Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1081

Archive 1075

←

Archive 1079

Archive 1080

Archive 1081

Archive 1082

Archive 1083

→

Archive 1085

I have written approval for use of content from the original author, how do I make sure it does not get deleted because of copyright again?

I have edited the wikipedia page on Johfra Bosschart. The majority of the content is published by the website https://www.johfra.nl/en/biographie/ and I have a written confirmation that I am allowed to use the entire content (text and images) to update the wikipedia page. The writer of this content is part of the Johfra Bosschart foundation (Jaap Bleumink). How do I make sure this information does not get deleted once again? I can show the proof of the confirmation from Jaap Bleumink, author of the text and owner of the images.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johfra_Bosschart IntlArtCollective (talk) 13:35, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Even if it's released under the correct license, it isn't appropriate as articles should be a summary of what independent reliable sources say, not what the subject or in this case, people with a financial interest wants. Praxidicae (talk) 13:40, 19 October 2020 (UTC

- Praxidicae: There is no financial interest with the author of this text whatsoever. He is part of the Johfra Foundation which is a non-profit organisation. So how does that conflict?

(edit conflict) I have reverted the addition. Please see WP:RS WP:SELFPUB WP:SELFCITE WP:BLP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:42, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

That's incorrect, they run the foundation, which is a huge conflict of interest and still isn't independent. Praxidicae (talk) 13:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

- That does not make sense. The foundation is non-profit and consists of academics who published multiple books on the biography of Johfra (non-profit). I do not understand whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IntlArtCollective (talk • contribs) 13:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

The Jofra Foundation and the Jofra Museum are not independent sources of information. And both would benefit (reputationally if not financially) if there were a more extensive description of Jofra's career at Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 13:52, 19 October 2020 (UTC

- David notMD Ok so that is interesting, because the dutch version of this page is actually written by members of the foundation. So how to go about it? It would be okay if I summarize or re-formulate this biography in its entirety? How else is his story and life work ever going to be represented on wikipidia? Referencing multiple sources from multiple authors? It does not compute with me at all that formal academic publications on the life of the artist are seen as subjective or having financial / reputational interest. I am all for a objective representation of the facts, but fact of the matter is that these publications are excerpts of the autobiography of the artist himself who died over 20 years ago.

Hello, IntlArtCollective. Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything which the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates, agents, or employers say about them. It is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and have not been prompted or fed information by the subject or their associates, have chosen to publish about them in reliable sources. If there is little such independent material, then the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article will be accepted. (This is a slight overstatement, but not by much: certain information can be taken from non-independent sources, and there are specific, different criteria available for particular classes of subject, such as WP:NARTIST). But if the bulk of the information is from an autobiography, the subject may not meet our criteria.

Each edition of Wikipedia is an independent project, with its own rules, and a subject may be acceptable on Dutch Wikipedia that isn't on English, and vice versa; also, in en-wiki we have thousands of articles which were created before we became as careful, and which would not be accepted if they were written now: this is likely to be true on other editions as well. --ColinFine (talk) 15:34, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

IntlArtCollective, leaving aside the issue of whether the Johfra Museum biography in an independent source, I doubt that the permission you received solves the copyright issue: Permission on Wikipedia must allow not only use on Wikipedia but also reuse anywhere for anything (including for-profit and modification). —teb728 t c 21:27, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

How Do You Add Categories To a New Article?

I just published my 6th new article, Dirty Sally, but I don't know how to add categories to an article. Other editors usually come along and add some later on, but I'd like to become a "real" editor and learn how to do it myself. This article is about a 1974 CBS western spinoff television show, and there are probably lots of categories to add, if I knew how to do it. Karenthewriter (talk) 14:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

A bare-bones answer: After finding that a category does exist, and noting exactly what it's called (including upper and lower case, and any terms in parentheses appended to it), go to the edit page of your article and at the bottom, add "[[Category:exact title of category]]"--with the square brackets, but without the quotation marks. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter: It's often helpful to look at the categories at the bottom of a similar article (in this case, Gunsmoke might be a good choice) and use the ones that are also appropriate to your article. Deor (User:Deor) 18:22, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Uporządnicki and User:Deor. Dirty Sally now has 4 categories, all added via the wonders of cut and paste. --Karenthewriter (talk) 22:31, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikitable under an infobox?

Not sure if this is right place to ask technical questions, but here goes... I want to get a small wikitable to appear directly underneath an infobox. Is there a style= parameter that can make that happen? Thanks! Assambrew (talk) 07:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Assambrew if I understand you correctly you need to add style="float:right;" to align the table to the right page margin. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:21, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Assambrew: I.e., start the table with:

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right"

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks guys, but I already tried "float:right". On edit page, I placed the wikitable directly under the infobox, then previewed. The wikitable then shows at the top, to the left of the infobox, floated right from the text. You can see this in my sandbox: [1]

I'm hoping to get the wikitable directly underneath the infobox. Assambrew (talk) 18:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Assambrew, it's possible that you might need to clear both on the element, or preferably, use Template:clear. If the infobox isn't floating it could also cause a similar effect. It may be the case that this isn't possible, due to the site wide CSS. Would you mind linking us to the page you are working on? Zindor (talk) 19:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Actually ignore my generic suggestion. I'm looking at your sandbox now. Zindor (talk) 19:16, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Zindor. But actually I may abandon my idea, which was to place a "Previous-Next" table on every article about Messier objects, as a convenient way of browsing through them. But now I realize, there's the Messier Objects template already at the bottom of each, which allows convenient browsing. Anyway, thanks for your time guys! Assambrew (talk) 22:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Global Taj international film festival

Hi Lonelyboy19896. I have relocated your post to the bottom of the page, so that it will be seen, and given it a title. Courtesy link Draft:Global Taj International Film Festival.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello All.. I Am Trying to make a page For Global Taj international film festival. i made the page & gave proper external link & citations & submitted on publish changes . now it's showing That your page has submitted for Review. Any idea how much time it will Take to review by the Team. Because this is my first edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonelyboy19896 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Lonelyboy19896. Since (every revision of) the page was a blatant copyright violation of the film festival's website, I have deleted the draft under section G12 of the Criteria for speedy deletion. Please see the message I will be posting to your talk page momentarily.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hii user : fuhghettaboutit  can you Tell me How i can improve to make page on Global Taj international film festival. as i know that wikipedia Always needs data from reliable source & not your own writing should be there. only the article should contain data from a website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonelyboy19896 (talk • contribs) 21:25, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Lonelyboy19896, please read WP:What Wikipedia is not, especially the section "Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion". Unless the festival has already been extensively written about by independent commentators (not just articles based on press releases) then it doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for WP:notability, and any work you put in to trying to get such an article published will be a complete waste of your time. --ColinFine (talk) 21:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks All for your help.  i am New editor on Wikipedia & will learn slowly slowly. can you Please help me with my Another Article made on a Short movie called Wrong Way by my friend Sandeep Bhojak. He is An actor & Director so i Am helping Him to Make his Short movie page. This movie is Released on youtube & won An award in film festival also. can you please Review it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonelyboy19896 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: aeepars to be about Draft:Wrong Way 2015. David notMD (talk) 22:02, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

yes This is The Article. i Am improving on It & working on It. This movie also selected in Film Festival.which i gave link in refrence. i need your approval to work on This page.This is my friend Short movie & carry a social message on Drugs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lonelyboy19896 (talk • contribs) 22:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Lonelyboy19896 Teahouse hosts try to answer questions about how to edit, but are not necessarily reviewers. You have submitted it. Reviewing can happen any time from days to several months. A big problem, however, is that to be Wikipedia-notable, it has to be written about at length in publications, that content not by anyone connected to the movie. David notMD (talk) 22:47, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Chateau

Hi I want to create a page for a singer/songwriter, named Chateau) Chateau (Vocalist, Songwriter) (talk) 23:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Chateau. Based on your username, it appears you want to write an autobiography. This is strongly discouraged and it will be impossible to write an article that "sticks", unless you have been the subject of significant coverage (think at least a few paragraphs dedicated to you), in reliable sources, that are entirely independent of you (for example, articles about you published in professional music industry magazines). Please read WP:Notability, and Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles. In sum, if those sources don't exist, no article is possible. If they do exist, you shouldn't be the person to write it. But: i) if they do; and ii) you are dead set on going ahead anyway: the way to write is not to summarize what you know about yourself and your career, but rather, to go to those reliable, third-party published sources, and then write only what they verify, in your own words, citing the sources you are summarizing as you go. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:13, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Translation tasks

Hi, I was looking at Wikipedia translation tasks listed in the community portal. If I am translating a page from another language to English Wikipedia, do I have to review it for notability or simply translate and publish/add to review over here? Thank you. WindlessLowlands (talk) 22:04, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@WindlessLowlands: The different language Wikipedias have different notability standards. The English Wikipedia's standards are among the highest, so you should review the sourcing before you decide to translate an article to English. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:40, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: Thank you. I'll keep that in mind. I will probably stick with editing for some time before I create any new pages. WindlessLowlands (talk) 22:52, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

WindlessLowlands. To expand on the above advice, by reading and participating in deletion discussions you can gain knowledge of Wikipedia's notability criteria and how they are applied.

We're always here at the Teahouse if you need assistance in future. Rosguill, any advice for this budding translator? Thanks, Zindor (talk) 23:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Zindor, I could give a bit more specific advice if I knew what topics WindlessLowlands is interested in, but generally speaking WP:THREE is a good newbie article writer's guide to notability. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Zindor: Thanks for the advice. I'll try to read the deletion discussions and make sense of them for now. I don't think I have enough or any experience to contribute to them at the moment. I have been reading essays and policies on notability, manual of style, what Wikipedia is not, and stuff like that for familiarization. WindlessLowlands (talk) 00:14, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Rosguill: Thanks for sharing WP:THREE. It seems like a good starting point. I am not interested in any particular topic right now, but I'll definitely ask for advice on notability if I think of something. WindlessLowlands (talk) 00:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Was there a technical change to the GA user topicon template?

I've been using Template:GA user topicon to list my GAs at the top of my Wikipedia userpage for years. Now it's suddenly printing "Wikipedia Good Article contributors" all over the top of my page. When I preview the templates' removal the plain text disappears. Is this an error or was there a change to the template? Please ping me in response. -Indy beetle (talk) 00:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC) Indy beetle (talk) 00:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Indy beetle Yes but not intentionally. I think it's because the new category wasnt wrapped in square brackets. Hopefully someone more awake than me gets there first to fix it lol. Zindor (talk) 00:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Should be ok now, I undid the change. Zindor (talk) 00:32, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Zindor: Thanks! -Indy beetle (talk) 00:33, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Multiple Metacritic Reviews

Writing a draft for Candleman, and sent it for review. What I've noticed, though, is that Candleman is cross-platform, and Metacritic has scores for each individual one (I currently only have it for switch). How do I list these individual scores in the table? Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 00:45, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Le Panini: A quick look at FIFA 20#Reception and Minecraft#Reception show that they list every platform, so I'd go with that. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 01:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

To all Wikipedia editors

>>>COMPLAINT<<<

Where does this end? All I would like is to have the Wikipedia article, that has been written about me, completed after 3 years of grief.

In 2017, after 15 years of full-time social documentary work, I was given a one-man exhibition at Firstsite gallery in Colchester, Essex, UK. The marketing company employed by the gallery reviewed my life’s work (which began in 1988) - all of the work that had been published by international news media, my commercial books and many other exhibitions - and told me I had, in their opinion, earned the opportunity to have a Wikipedia article published about my work, because it is notable.

Apparently, although everything to do with Wikipedia is a mystery to me, a German couple, or a couple in Germany, unknown to me, made the Wikipedia article in a month and it was published. The article was 95% incomplete and misleading, but I was grateful to have it and, because I was involved with motorcycling 2,500 miles off-road, from Brisbane to Australia’s remotest Aboriginal community, didn’t have a chance at that moment to say anything in order to improve the article.

Years later, annoyed that my article looked amateur, I attempted to edit the article myself. I chose a username, using my own website address, and that was the moment the gates of hell opened. I was used to, up to that moment, of using the same username for online banking, social media, online shopping etc with my website address and I didn’t know Wikipedia wouldn’t allow this. I didn’t realise knowledge of code was needed to correct the article, since you are still using HTML, or a derivative, and made a mistake, my 2nd one. I made the page look untidy so contacted an editor for help, who reverted it. Because I had attempted to edit the page, had an illegal username AND WAS ACCUSED OF PAID-EDITING, I was promptly blocked. I had nothing to do with paid-editing but that didn’t seem to make a difference, I was blocked, end of story.

More time passed and I decided I had a spare month I could afford to waste in order to try and rectify this problem. That’s a month editors, that means 4 weeks, 30 days, 12 hours a day, do the math, yes - 360 hours to waste working every day on the Wikipedia article about my work.

I worked out that to be able to do anything at all I had to get myself unblocked, as by this time I had learnt I needed an editor to revise my Wikipedia article as I was not allowed to go near it. To begin with, I had wanted to update my profile photograph, but was told this was too hard to do. So instead it was easier to just delete it. After more time still I decided I wanted to re-instate the original photo, even though it was outdated and 7 years old, because any other photo that wasn’t a selfie would be impossible to use. So CaptainEek helped me to upload the original photo and this involved jumping through many hoops. But finally I got there.

Captain Eek said I could ask (them, I respect this person is gender-neutral) for more help but when I came around to asking them later on, they said they were too busy to be involved with Wikipedia so I should look elsewhere. I then exchanged approximately 50 emails with Cordless Larry, who was very obliging but became exasperated because they were not IT specialists and could not answer all of my questions. I asked for marked screen grabs to help me navigate Wikipedia correctly and eventually managed to change my username after 3 attempts and then, it was accepted, though seemingly still not approved.

Then, with a new username that I was allowed to use, I was unblocked and was directed to the Teahouse where I could ask editors for help with the article about the work I have created.

More hassle. I find an editor who is very obliging but who says I owe them for the work they are doing and would like me to do some work for them in return. I thought Wikipedia was a free resource, so why do I always have to do something for people in return? It is suggested that I be paid to design a book for a spouses Xmas present where a photo of the editor and I will be used in the book, together with any photo they choose of mine, that has been uploaded to Wikipedia Commons, because they don’t need my permission now as they have suggested I waive my copyright. And that I also ride to London to photo a collection of sculpture for their project that ultimately sees me travel to Zimbabwe. I am told to buy a 2 TB hard drive and told to pay them between £0.01 and £1 with Paypal, to their Paypal account. I don’t understand what is happening but pay the £1. (Isn’t this the sort of thing that Chinese and Nigerians do, to scam you?!)

In the meantime, I am asked to write an article for The Signpost. I write and post my photos for 6 and a half hours at the request of the editor-in-chief of The Signpost, Smallbones. After submitting my article and doing what was asked of me, Smallbones tells me that there might be problems with copyright and my captions and photos and...well, everything. And this person is skeptical of me because of paid-editing, and they don't want to pay me for my work, which further devalues my work and partly why I unashamedly have to live in a tent all year round - because people don't appreciate the value of my photography and don't pay me.

Next the Xmas project/Zimbabwe project editor is hassled by other editors because they (the editor) have posted too many of my photos to Wikimedia Commons. Another editor warns Zimbabwe editor to be careful, because now that he is helping me, there is a ‘relationship’ between him and I. What?! Not only that BUT if my photos are used to support the article about my work it can be considered ‘self-promoting’! So the amount of my photos being uploaded to my article should be reduced, if not completely excluded? So I make the decision, if my photos aren’t allowed on the article about my work, The Signpost would be hypocritical also, if they used my work as that too could be considered self-promoting. And because Smallbones is being small-minded about my article and quote ‘will take out the beautiful parts’ and sends his edited version back to me in segments, with links to each segment, I decide to back off completely.

Let me tell you editors, there are too many chiefs and not enough Indians in your little group of fanatics. When I submit my work to the BBC my editor takes it and that is the last I hear until it is published. There are no snide remarks, no blustering, postering or showboating, no lengthy tournament of ping pong with emails going back and forwards all and every day. There is a simple one-time transfer of information that is edited and published, and not to around to 1000 people, but 100’s of 1000’s of people. And do you think that the BBC does not fact check and have strict T & C’s and codes of conduct? Who has been around longest? An online search reveals that the BBC has been around 79 years longer than Wikipedia, and it shows.

Editors at Wikipedia are not God, you are not infallible, you can’t expect me to do work for you in return for making my page look as it should. Editors here don’t have power over others and shouldn’t be flexing muscles they don’t have. Editors should be respectful of people who have articles written about them and maintain Wikipedia standards by making sure that the people on your site are respected and properly represented. You lot are zealots for facts and truth but in reality you are hypocrites and counter-productive to your cause. You cause more problems than providing cures. All I would like is to have an editor make the article about me complete, to the present date. But if an editor helps too much, they are told to be careful because they have now formed a relationship! In the future, perhaps it is wiser to have a different editor help every week so there is no risk of favouritism or even...nepotism once that 'relationship' has been formed!

So, where does this end? Are there any normal people out there? Who can help me without expecting anything in return. To get the article that is about my work representing my work properly? A person I can communicate with without having to send 10 emails a day, and who isn’t hassled for helping me by other editors and where one problem after another isn’t raked up. I appreciate that for many of you, this is your hobby and you don’t have anything else to do, but others, me for example, has a life to lead and other work to do. Make this a simpler, more reasonable process in the future, and stop acting as though you are all so special.

Perhaps go out there and do something notable so you can have your own article about you, so you don’t have to waste other people’s time, 'editing'.EddieLeVisco (talk) 09:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link Ed Gold. Theroadislong (talk) 09:45, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

To your last comment, we are all so special. We labor anonymously to improve articles so that people we have never met, nor will, benefit from good information. It's an encyclopedia. Yes, there is an article about you (Ed Gold), and yes, you are not satisfied with it, but that does not mean that you, or a friend/acquaintance helping you, gets to change the content to what you want. I cannot speak to your other frustrating experiences. However, to date, User:Michael D. Turnbull has uploaded 140 of your photographs to Wikipedia Commons (and mentioned the possibility of uploading hundreds more), and at the article about you, created a portal to that collection. As best I can tell, none of these have been used in any Wikipedia articles. I consider that an abuse of Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 10:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@David notMD: How can uploading something to a site that isn't Wikipedia be an abuse of Wikipedia? 2A02:C7F:BE04:700:B0C3:F665:5C5F:684C (talk) 10:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Because of the portal. David notMD (talk) 10:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Lastly, to what end are these dozens of low resolution photos being placed at Commons if they are of living people, from whom permission-to-use may be required? The files on those photos include this text: "Although this work is freely licensed or in the public domain, the person(s) shown may have rights that legally restrict certain re-uses unless those depicted consent to such uses. In these cases, a model release or other evidence of consent could protect you from infringement claims. Though not obliged to do so, the uploader may be able to help you to obtain such evidence." This means that editors would need to contact Turnbull, who would contact Gold, who either does or does not have model release or consent documentation from each person in the photo. David notMD (talk) 13:42, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I am just going to respond to this insulting diatribe by EddieLeVisco to tell him that Wikipedia is just an encyclopaedia. It summarises key published information about notable subjects. It is not a personal website. We are not here for him. It is created and managed by volunteers, and it operates by consensus, and few of its 6,176,800+ articles are really complete. In reality, there are lots of 'Indians' and no 'Chiefs' here and, yes, that can sometimes be a problem folk have to deal with. We do not have a 'Complaints Department'; we are not paid to give a service, nor would legitimate editors ever seek payment from anyone. (Sounds like you were scammed - sorry to hear that, mate) We do our best to help people here - sometimes even off-wiki. But EddieLeVisco (a.k.a. Ed Gold) already has an article about them; he has a chum uploading 1000+ of his photos, and has only made two approaches for help - the first on 9th October, and now this, as far as I can tell. Yet everyone seems to be at fault but themselves. And to portray the creation of an encyclopaedia page about him as some terrible, convoluted three year saga seems somewhat OTT. The convolutions come when that subject feels they have a right to get the page created perfectly, just as they want it. That won't happen. The best advice to get what you want is to invest time and money into enhancing and promoting your already quite impressive personal website. That way you'll get it to your liking, in every way. It already shows you are clearly a really great photographer, but your interpersonal skills seem somewhat lacking. I really don't know how anyone could expect people to even think about helping them after they end their rant by saying: "Perhaps go out there and do something notable so you can have your own article about you, so you don’t have to waste other people’s time, 'editing'." I'm sorry they found their experience here frustrating, but I for one won't be 'wasting' any of my time by offering help; I'm sure others now feel the same, too. (If you do find uncited stuff about you that's wrong, you are free to remove it immediately. Otherwise, please read WP:OWN.) Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:19, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't read it as all an insulting diatribe. I have a lot of sympathy with what EddieLeVisco says. I will respond to just two of his points:

"there are too many chiefs and not enough Indians in your little group of fanatics". Yes, the lack of any hierarchy can be unsettling for us too. No, we're quite a big group, I see that there are 3,849 editors who've made over 25,000 edits. Yes, fanatics is a fair description.

"I find an editor who is very obliging but who says I owe them for the work they are doing and would like me to do some work for them in return." In my view, that is not acceptable. If the facts are really as you say, I'd like to know who that editor was. When I do things for people at Wikipedia, I never ask for or expect anything in return. Maproom (talk) 15:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC) Strike that. Maproom (talk) 22:18, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

• You are here for self-promotion, but Wikipedia is not for promotion. We are writing an encyclopedia with a really low bar for inclusion. That is why borderline notable topics get to get included here but it also means there are far too many articles and it will take Wikipedia volunteers many more decades to get even the vital topics to a reasonably good standard.
  You are in a hurry because you want to polish up the biography in question before Nov 1. Please tell us why any of us should care? No subproject has categorised that article as above "low" priority. You don't even want to make edit requests to the talk page because that would put your attempts at promoting the subject too close to the article. You can't have everything you want in your own schedule from people you're not paying to get things done. Please stop wasting people's time, no matter how worthless you think they are. Suck it up and make edit requests (use this if you are in too much of a hurry to figure out how to), or don't. Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:48, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Editing a Wikipedia

Why same pages like Wuhan cannot be edited?I tried to edit but it was locked. Rpn21 (talk) 14:05, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Rpn21: - some pages have had significant amounts of problematic editing. This is usually vandalism or edit-warring. This can trigger varying levels of protection (semi-protect, the lowest, being the most common). These limit direct editing to those with a certain track record. For semi-protected pages you need to be autoconfirmed, which means having 10 edits and an article 4 days old.

Usually protection is temporary, but repeat instances can lead to indefinite/long-term protection.

You can still request edits on the article's talk page. In the meantime, around 95% of our articles are not protected. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Rpn21: the page Edit requests tells you how to make the requests that Nosebagbear mentions. --ColinFine (talk) 15:36, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Lol I was about to make a new sub page in Wuhan Wikipedia giving information about how this virus started from there.still I don't understand why we can't write that there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpn21 (talk • contribs) 06:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Pronouns in the bios of people of importance

I was wondering if there was a way to add people's pronouns to the little sidebar with information like birth, death, marital status, ect. and if this could become common practice for new articles? Zin373 (talk) 06:43, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Zin373 and welcome to the Teahouse!

This should only be done when there is a reliable source (not, for example, the subject's facebook page)) that takes notice of the pronouns and reports on them.

Currently {{Infobox person}} does not have any support for this particular bit of information, but if there can be a callsign= parameter, there can't be much objection to adding a pronouns= parameter. But you'd have to raise this as a formal proposal, probably at Template talk:Infobox person before any action will be taken. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:58, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

• Zin373, welcome to the Teahouse! The sidebars you are referring to are called infoboxes, and they are used in templates like Template:Infobox person.

That's an interesting suggestion. You could try raising it at the Village pump idea lab to get some more feedback. Adding pronouns to infoboxes project-wide would be a huge change, so there would likely be many considerations. You may also be interested in Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Identity. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:03, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata

How to add entry or create Page in wikidata? Wpedia User (talk) 07:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Wpedia User, go to wikidata:Special:NewItem. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

More help

An article in the draft space Draft:Nemilicheri, is declined at this time with a note 'Good content , now improve sourcing' and the reviewer also left a message that the article is improperly sourced.

Please help me in this regard the lack of improving proper sourcing process or method to be an article to be published in the main space. Thanks.

-- Helppublic (talk) 05:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Helppublic. The draft in question is Draft:Nemilicheri, which I have wikilinked for the convenience of other editors. There are many assertions in your draft which are unreferenced. Every claim of importance or significance should be referenced to an independent reliable source. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Helppublic: one thing I would still wish for as a Wikipedia user is better information about the sources you do use. (I agree with Cullen that there should also be more sources, but this is about the ones that are already in the draft.) I posted some information about this on your user talk page a couple of days ago (here), and I saw that you thanked me for it (which was very nice of you :-) ). After that you did add more information about the titles of the various sources, and that's great, but there are still some things missing in how the sources are presented.

The first reference is (or was, because I have updated it a bit now) listed at the bottom as ""Census 2011/District Census Handbook/State Tamil Nadu/Part A ebook (CRC)/Thiruvallur/3301_PART_A_DCHB_THIRUVALLUR.pdf/Page 30 (ii) Census_Town/Nemilicheri (CT)". Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India. Retrieved 18 October 2020." You had added a lot of detail to the title, but the URL still led to www.censusindia.gov.in, which is the main page for the Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India. As a reader, if I click on the title of the reference I expect that I will find the exact source, in this case the District Census Handbook for Thiruvallur. That URL is https://censusindia.gov.in/2011census/dchb/DCHB_A/33/3301_PART_A_DCHB_THIRUVALLUR.pdf . Since that is a very long publication, you should also provide the page where this information (the population of Nemilicheri) can be found. After a bit of searching, I found it on page 42, so the parameter "page=42" should be added to the reference. I have also changed the title – it is tricky to know exactly what the title is and what is the "work" in this kind of publication, but I think "District Census Handbook, Thiruvallur, Village and town directory" is OK as a title. Somebody might come along and change it to something better, though. I hope all this makes sense! Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:12, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Why were the changes undone?

I have made some edits to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masters_of_Illusion_%28TV_series%29 to clarify the season designations for The CW. I added 2 references to verify my data. Brianis19 has undone my changes twice with no explanation. Why were the changes undone? What is wrong with the additions made? Waltp9999 (talk) 08:40, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Waltp9999: When you find that you're reverted by someone and they don't leave a reason why in the edit summary, talk to that editor first and ask for clarification through their user talk page (in this case, User talk:Brianis19). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:20, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Review

How many days it takes to review an article if I create on draft ?? Satyajitcreator (talk) 09:27, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Satyajitcreator: There are currently around 3,700 pending drafts in the backlog. Drafts are reviewed by volunteers in no particular order, so we really can't tell you how long it'll take; it could be a couple hours or a couple months. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:31, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey @Ganbaruby: thanks for your reply.

Eeeek - first timer questions!

Hi, So, I made a page, Nadim Nsouli, and I think I have done ok.....but I'm not convinced. When I try and add tags, like the page suggests to get reviewed faster, it says the draft doesn't exist. But I can see it! What am I doing wrong??

Thank you - in anticipation of your help!

20Edu 20Education (talk) 11:41, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@20Education: I think it's because you're putting in Nadim Nsouli, which indeed doesn't exist. Try Draft:Nadim Nsouli instead. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:40, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

can you semi-protect help?

help seems to be a target for vandals, which you can see in the page history. is it possible to have it semi-protected? I am an unexperienced editor and if I have done something wrong by asking this question, I am sorry. Firestar9990 (talk) 12:48, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Firestar9990, and welcome to the Teahouse. Head over to WP:RPP and file a request, and be sure to include a short rationale for protecting the page. An administrator will respond shortly. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:55, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

How do I add a new section?

Hello! I've already looked at the tutorial about sections, but I'm still a bit confused. How do I add a new section to an existing article? How do I insert a section between two existing sections? Thank you in advance. Deathconsciousness (talk) 13:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit the section immediately above the one you want to add. At the foot of the material in the edit window, at the far left of a new line, insert "== title ==" (without the quotation marks, and of course with your title rather than "title"). On a new line below this, start typing your text for the new section. -- Hoary (talk) 13:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding on to this, adding more equal signs will change the type of title, as shown below:

Question regarding tables

Hello,

I would like to know if there is a way to put tables or templates next to each other in an article. In User:Longchess/toolbox, I would like to put templates next to each other, and in Happy Valley (Pennsylvania), I would like to put tables next to each other. (Demographics section)

Thanks, longchess (talk · contribs · block user) 15:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Longchess: I'd tinker around with column templates like Template:Col-begin, which divides the screen into sections. Read the documentation on that page to figure out how to use it. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 15:59, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Fixing connected contributor issue

Hi, I gave someone bad advice, namely that she could edit an entry about herself as long as the statements were objective and backed up by reliable sources. Now her entry is flagged as having a "connected contributor." Since this is my fault, I would like to fix it. What could I do? Good city brew pub (talk) 14:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? Which entry? Ruslik_Zero 14:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

If you are asking about Chloé Valdary, the article is not tagged. The Talk page mentions that User:Cvaldary is connected to the article, which appears to be true, she (assuming Cvaldary is Chloé Valdary) has made a few relatively modest edits in the past. You should advise her to not do so going forward, but I do not see a need to remove the Talk page mention, as it does not compromise the validity of the article. David notMD (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Obituaries

Hi... How do I add an obituary for a person who is world famous for her work in Music Therapy? 99.255.178.224 (talk) 16:31, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user: welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does not host obituaries; but if she meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then we can have an article about her. Creating a new article is difficult for inexperienced editors (I recommend spending a few months improving some of our six million existing articles, and learning how Wikipedia works, before trying it) but if you want to have a go, please start by reading your first article --ColinFine (talk) 16:41, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Wanted: Normal person to finish WP article

Moved from WT:Teahouse § Wanted: Normal person to finish WP article

 – Belongs here, not on talk. Giraffer ^munch 11:53, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

3 years after an article was written about my work on Wikipedia it is still less than 50% complete. I repeat LESS THAN 50% COMPLETE.

The work I have done on my article page is being listed and, if this is the correct way to layout the article, 11 projects have so far been mentioned. There are at least another 15 projects that are worthy of mention and that can be backed up with verifiable referenced sources.

Is it possible, at all, to find an editor here that doesn't expect an exchange of effort in return for helping me with this article? Is it possible to find an editor who isn't a control freak, who doesn't make problems for the sake of it, who isn't pedantic and pernickety, who isn't a bully, and who won't accuse me of 'paid-editing' or lying. Now that I have been unblocked and chosen a username that has been accepted I would simply like to get the article finished in the least painful way.

You have already established that my photographs cannot be used on my article as it is self-promoting. This makes me question that surely the text is self-promoting also? How about having a blank white page about all that I have done in my life so far to account for over 100 media stories that have been written about my work? That surely would meet your approval and would mean that I don't need to add secondary and tertiary sources. Why has it taken 3 years to establish that the article needs additional sources?

I don't want to work with an editor who wants me to do stuff for them in return. I just want to have the article about my work brought up to date, without having to fall down a rabbit hole, and without spending 12 hours every day on this, without playing these tedious, time consuming petty games.

I'm not reading messages from Wikipedia because no doubt they are from angry Trump supporters. Find another way to contact me and maybe, one day, we can get an article that is up to date and truthful and doesn't have large gaps and omissions. Or, if this is no longer any fun for you editors why don't you completely delete my article as having a page that is less than half done DOES NOT SERVE ME OR ANYONE ELSE PROPERLY OR WELL.EddieLeVisco (talk) 10:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Article looks to me like there was already an editor helping, and you appear to be in direct contact with that editor. Koncorde (talk) 10:56, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes but he no longer believes that I am acting in accord with WP:AGF. He has switched from “I have been watching developments over the time Mike Turnbull has been kindly helping to edit the Wikipedia article about me. I am not impressed by how Mike Turnbull has been treated, given that he stood up to the plate to help me and no other editor did.” to "so why do I always have to do something for people [Mike Turnbull] in return?" He fails to mention that the "something" I had asked him to discuss doing would be in the nature of a commission for which I would pay him. All that discussion had occurred off-wiki in e-mails between us that used the contact address for him that anyone can obtain from his website. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:55, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link Ed Gold, articles are never finished Wikipedia is an ongoing project and we are all volunteers here, and insulting us won't help you get your own way. Theroadislong (talk) 12:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@EddieLeVisco: As you indicated in your last post here, we get that you didn't have the most pleasant experience here. That sucks. But honestly, you're not all that special. Articles here are written by people that want to write about the subject, and your rants aren't really helping your case here. We have a system to make sure our articles are as neutral and verifiable as we can. You don't own your article, and we don't care if you like it or not; as editors, our only priority is making a well written article, no matter how long it takes. You may make edit requests along with all the other articles and see if anyone feels like writing about you. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:54, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

You're looking for a "normal person", EddieLeVisco. When somebody writes something and SWITCHES TO FULL CAPITALS, I sense that they picture their readers as morons. I'm not so happy to be treated as a moron, but it doesn't much worry me: I have a thick skin. I tend to busy myself with articles about photographers who don't demand my attention, let alone insult me. But perhaps I'm abnormal. Given more time, I'd expand a lot of indisputably terrible "articles" (to stretch a definition) about indisputably outstanding photographers: Issei Suda is just one among dozens of these. -- Hoary (talk) 13:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

See also this person. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Your recourse at this moment has two options: 1) accept the article as it is, and the expectation that no one will visit it and then decide it needs more content; or 2) on the Talk page of the article, make very specific proposals for content to be added, with the hope that an editor will visit the article, go to the Talk page, and decide to either act on your request, or not. David notMD (talk) 17:01, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

editing a page

I want to create a page for Bankrol Hayden but the name is already redirected to his record label, so the link will not turn red. What do I do? 76.28.135.78 (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I've created a draftspace for you, here: Draft:Bankrol Hayden. If the article gets approved, the redirect will be removed. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

And I have inserted the template for biographys. See also WP:YFA. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:08, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

How to contribute a picture of the surface of lava flows on the north shore of Lake Superior

I would like to contribute a picture taken of the surface of one of the lave flows on the north shore of Lake Superior to add to the Duluth Complex article. It illustrates very well the stresses that have shaped this landscape over the past billion years. Cracks running every which way as this semi amorphous glass deposit was stressed by glaciers and the lake itself freezing and thawing. I've contributed and edited a variety of things over past years but could not remember my user name or password to log in so I created a new account, sorry if that would cause any confusion. David L. Hasse (talk) 17:08, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, David L. Hasse. If you own the copyright to the picture, and are willing to license it under CC-BY-SA, you can upload it directly to Wikimedia Commons using the upload wizard: as far as I know, Commons doesn't prevent new accounts from uploading material. --ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

New entry

Hi how do i add a new entry Steven irvine (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? If its about writing articles, click this ink for info: Wikipedia:YFA Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 17:32, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I suspect it involves this User:Steven irvine/sandbox, Wikipedia isn't a means to promote yourself I'm afraid. Theroadislong (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

In addition, Steven, you will be using up your time—for all of us a precious resource—on an endeavor that is likely one that cannot succeed. So I advise you to not go any further. The fact that your book series is not yet released and you are a "new author" are strong indicators that no article (one that can "stick", and will, not be deleted) is possible. This is because we only properly have articles on subjects that have been the subject of significant coverage (think at least a few paragraphs dedicated to the proposed topic), in reliable sources, that are entirely independent of you and/or the book series (for example, third-party articles about you or the series published in professional magazines). Please read generally Wikipedia:Notability, and specifically (as the case may be), Wikipedia:Notability (books) or WP:AUTHOR. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:10, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

New editor

I would love to join but I don't know what to do here.Tanks400 (talk) 18:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC) Tanks400 (talk) 18:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Tanks400, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have joined! You have created an account, and edited on this page, so you are a Wikipedia editor. I see you have already made some edits, which have been reverted. The problem is that you are making the standard beginner's mistake (I remember making it myself) of adding what you know to an article. Wikipedia isn't interested in what you know, or what I know, or what any random person on the internet knows, because there is no way for a reader to check that it is accurate. What you need to do, if you want to add some inforamtion to an article, is to find a published source (preferably one independent of the subject of the article) and cite that source (see referencing for beginners). It is the citations which give Wikipedia value.

I suggest you look at Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure to learn more about how you can help us build an encyclopaedia. --ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Writing an article for an artist

how can i write an article for an artist that has links to other artists with existing wikipedia pages? Drahmah (talk) 19:52, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Read Help:Your first article. Be sure the person actually meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines first, see WP:Notability and WP:Notability (music) for details. Be sure you provide adequate sources, see WP:Citing sources, WP:Reliable sources, and WP:Independent sources for details. You might also want to read WP:WikiProject Music. There is a link near the top called "Discussion" where you can ask questions about how to write about music-related subjects. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:14, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Userbox

Where is the "this user tries to do the right thing. if they are doing something wrong, please let them know." userbox? Antrotherkus (talk) 19:36, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Duplicate question. Is now answered in a thread below. Zindor (talk) 21:05, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Changes to the Helen Keller page

Hi there!

Helen Selsdon here! I am the archivist at the American Foundation for the Blind (AFB). For 18 years I have been in charge of Helen Keller's archival collection. Keller worked for AFB for 44 years and bequeathed her archival collection to the organization when she died in 1968.

For many years now I have wished to make corrections to the Helen Keller Wikipedia page, but do not know how to begin doing this. The page contains factual errors, and does not adequately reflect her lifelong career as a champion for people who are blind and visually impaired.

Can somebody please help me with this?

Thank you! Helen Selsdon Wikipedia username: BlindAdvocacy1 BlindAdvocacy1 (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Helen/BlindAdvocacy1! Glad to see people who are trying to correct errors. What I would suggest is going to the talk page for Helen Keller's article and request the edits you want fixed. Be sure to back up your requests with reliable sources that we can verify. I will caution, though, that the aim of Wikipedia is not to right great wrongs or advocate for one issue or another, so as we are improving Helen's article, we may have to be careful not to be overly promotional, you know what I mean? Bkissin (talk) 20:45, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Given your position, you should also declare that you are in effect a paid editor. See WP:PAID You should declare this on your User page (pretty much the wording you have above, or else there is a template to use). Also, being Paid is why Bkissin directed you to proposing changes on the article's Talk page rather than editing the article directly. The follow-up will be that an editor not connected to HK or AFB will either make the requested changes, or not. Be patient. David notMD (talk) 21:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

BlindAdcocacy1 Also, review what is already on the Talk page, including the two archives of older discussions. Could be that what you want to change has already been discussed and decided against. David notMD (talk) 21:27, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

How do I know if the article is ready and how to submit?

I am making the wikipedia page for a professor, who is a major contriubtor in the field. Currently I have the page in my user sandbox, can you please guide me to see how to check if the article is ready for submission, and How should I do it? Thank you Xuexiujia (talk) 20:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Xuexiujia. That's a good question. Providing you're not so close to the subject that you "can't see the wood for the trees", you'll 'know' its nearly ready when it is easy to read, sounds like a short, succinct encyclopaedia entry about an interesting person, and everything within it is Verifiable by reference to reliable sources, and if it looks and reads like other similar articles on professors. Right now, User:Xuexiujia/sandbox, it's lacking a lead paragraph to summarise why this person is notable, and your own first paragraph is an incomprehensible list of apparently random words (job titles?) that might mean something to the subject, but certainly isn't written in flowing English. Much of the other bits look extremely promotional, as if the person themself has written it, and doesn't want to miss a single thing out. I often tell people that "less is more" on Wikipedia. It's far better to be short and succinct about a person, and cut out the stuff that looks like bullet points from their LinkedIn page or CV. A good article should be a pleasure to read - I'm afraid this it hasn't yet reached that point - but keep at it! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Xuexiujia: if this is about User:Xuexiujia/sandbox, it's a long way off ready. The first sentence is very long and unreadable, I don't think it has a verb in it, so I was put off trying to read further. There's a lot of unwarranted boldface further down the page. But both those are easily put right. Unfortunately there's another problem that may be harder to address. A Wikipedia article should be based on what has been written about its subject in reliable independent published sources; and those sources should be cited in the article. Your sandbox cites no sources at all. Maproom (talk) 21:20, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I cut a lot that has no place in an article. To confirm his notability, references must be to published stuff ABOUT him (not by him). And a standard Wikipedia question - what is your relation to the person? Employee? Relative? Friend? Coworker? Student? David notMD (talk) 21:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Please note that certain revisions of the draft have now been deleted in light of copyright concerns.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:05, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Pictures

Hello! I was wondering how to add pictures to a Wikipedia page. When I insert them, it always says that they are not able to be viewed for free. Could you please explain how to insert a picture? Thanks! Bunnyrabbitbunny (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Images should answer most of your questions. Please be sure to respect copyrights. See WP:Copyright policy for details. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Bunnyrabbitbunny: If your question relates to Draft:Toyota Camatte Petta, there is insufficient content and only one reference which is not to merit being a separate article. To avoid disappintment, you would be better off not making lots of really short, basic draft articles about individual models, but adding content to relevant pages about the series, such as Toyota concept vehicles (2010–2019). At present, that draft stands no chance of being moved to mainspace, and some of your other drafts seem equally flimsy. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:20, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft of article not reviewed for many weeks

Hello, an article I drafted (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vicente_Chamber_Orchestra) is not showing any updates. What is the best way to have it reviewed and hopefully published? Thanks! 47.153.142.146 (talk) 22:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

You have submitted it for review. As noted, "This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,737 pending submissions waiting for review." You will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 22:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Tool for finding links

I thought there was tool for findings pages that might have subjects that could link back to a page you are editing. I can't seem to find that tool now. Muirton (talk) 21:43, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Muirton: If your page name is Foo bar, I would use Search to search for "Foo bar" -insource:"[[Foo bar" (See correction below), to find articles with that page name, but not if it's already linked. Some additional tweaking may be needed if it's too common a name and gets false hits. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: I've used search. I probably should have been more specific. A regular search takes you to the article page, and then you need to look through the page to find your search hit. I used a tool last year that takes you right to the word you searched for in the article when you click on the search result. I don't know where I got the tool. I was hoping for help in finding it again. Muirton (talk) 17:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Muirton: Once you're on the search results page, use the browser's "Find in this page" (usually Ctrl-F) to search for Foo bar. Then, middle-click (or left-click if you've configured your browser to open new links in new tabs/windows) on one of the entries in the search results to go to that page in a new tab. Do a "Find again" (usually with F3) to search for the Foo bar in that page. When you're done editing the page to add the link, close it to go back to the search results and repeat as needed. There may well be scripts that package this up neatly (maybe involving Chrome's extension to search from URL syntax with the #:~:text=Foo%20bar suffix), but this is how I do it "manually" with basic tools. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

This? Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool and Muirton: That tool includes pages that are already linked to the target, though, which the search does not. At least now that I've fixed it, that is : [2] searches for "Foo bar" -insource:/\[\[\s*Foo bar/ —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1 and Usedtobecool: These responses have been helpful. Thanks guys Muirton (talk) 00:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

userboxes

sorry for posting this question in an unrelated thread, where is the userbox for "this user tries to do the right thing"?

(FYI, I didnt add a new section when i should have) Antrotherkus (talk) 19:43, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there Antrotherkus, you might find what you are looking for in Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Policies#Civility. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 19:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

This user tries to do the right thing. If they make a mistake, please let them know.

{{user oops}}. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Commons photo licensing question

GMC revealed the GMC Hummer EV today, and have provided press photos that anyone in the press may use. I uploaded 2 of them to Wikimedia commons, but GMC didn't state the photos licensing. What should I put for licensing/permission to use the photos? The photos in question are File:2022-GMC-HUMMER-EV-001.jpg and File:2022-GMC-HUMMER-EV-012.jpg. The photos are both provided by GMC's Presrrom photos. The first photos original source is https://media.gmc.com/media/us/en/gmc/hummer-ev.html and the second photos source is https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gmc/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2020/oct/1020-hummer-edition-1.html. On the page of the first photo, where other press photos can be found, it states "You will find several assets on this site for your use at the time of reveal, including press releases, videos, photos and social media content." The second photo comes from a different page, but is also on the GMC Pressroom website, like the first photo, so I assume similar permission for that photo apply as well.

The actual licensing of the photo, such as it's copyright, creative commons licensing or other is not given, so what should I give for the photos licening and/or permission to use the photos on there Wikimedia commons pages? Greshthegreat (talk) 04:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

At the very bottom of each of those pages is a link to https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. That license does not allow for commercial re-use of the material, so it's not acceptable for use on Wikipedia. Rojomoke (talk) 05:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Greshthegreat. Unless you took the photos yourself or the photographer who did has given their WP:CONSENT, Commons will unlikely be able to keep the photos you've uploaded per c:COM:OTRS. See c:Commons:Licensing and c:Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Vehicles for more specifc information, but generally the shapes, etc. of a car isn't likely going to be considered eligible for copyright protection; the photo of a car, however, is a different story and the copyright holder of the a photo is generally considered to be held by the person who takes it. Commons only accepts content which is 100% free so to speak; it doesn't accept any fair use content per c:COM:FAIR and publicity photos provided by GMC are going to be considered protected by copyright unless it explicity says some place that they're not. If you scroll down to the very bottom of the original sources you've given for each photo, you'll see " Creative Commons©" in tiny print, and clicking on that link lead to this page. Non-commercial licenses are not accepted by Commons or Wikipedia which means that the content from such pages should be uploaded to Commons unless you can show it has been specifically released under another acceptable license.

Finally, Commons and Wikipedia are technically separate project with their own policies and guidelines. If you'd like a more definitive answer from the Commons community, you can try asking about this at c:COM:VPC. Here at the Teahouse, we can give our opinion on what might be the case when it comes to Commons images, but we can really resolve any issues with Commons images here on Wikipedia; they'll need to be resolved on Commons and the files you uploaded are likely going to be tagged for speedy deletion by a bot or a Commons editor fairly soon if they remain without a valid and acceptable copyright license. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

How to create a wiki page

How do I create my wiki page? Amitmisra21 (talk) 05:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Amitmisra21. What do you mean by my wiki page? Do you want to create a Wikipedia article about something or do you want to create a user page? There are different policies and guidelines applicable to each so if you can clarify what type of page you're referring to, a Teahouse host can probably give you a more specific answer. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Amitmisra21, if your goal is to write an acceptable encyclopedia article, then you should read and study Your first article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Amitmisra21. If you are asking about your autobiography at Draft:Amit Misra, users are discouraged from writing autobiographies. —teb728 t c 05:35, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

My submitted draft is now missing?

Why would my submitted draft be missing in the "Draft AfC submissions"? I am pretty sure that I saw it there last week at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AfC_sorting/Culture/Visual_arts.Desmond123x (talk) 04:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Desmond123x. Are you referring to the draft discussed here. You can find it at Draft:Brit Bunkley. Another editor named AndreaSG50 removed the "AFC submission" template from the top of the draft's page with this edit, which is probably why it's no longer listed at Wikipedia:AfC sorting/Culture/Visual arts. Are you working together with this other editor in trying to create an article about Brit Bunkley? You and that account both have basically the same content in your user sandboxes (User:AndreaSG50/sandbox and User:Desmond123x/sandbox); so, maybe one of you can shed some light on what's going on here since it seem to be something more than just a coincidence. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:58, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes we are working on tis article together. She is fairly new and removed it by mistake. How do we get it back on as submission? Desmond123x (talk) 06:08, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Desmond123x and AndreaSG50: It sounds like you both know the artist and have started out by working just on this article together. So I have left advice on your talk pages as to how to declare any Conflict of Interest you may have before proceeding further. It's a simple thing, involving leaving an explanation on your userpage, if appropriate. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I live in the same city as the artist where he has exhibited. I am interested in his work and decided to write about it, with his friend who has access to many of the sources cited. I am not being paid. All sources are legitimate, easily verified and most are notable and speak for themselves. How is this a COI in a small city in a small nation? How do I put it back onto an "AFC submission"? Desmond123x (talk) 10:22, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Sorry Des! My apologies! I'm not sure how that happened. How do we get it back on to the "AFC submission"? AndreaSG50 (talk) 06:16, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I declared before and am declaring now (as I did on my userpage). I am a friend of Brit Bunkley. I was asked to help with the article with Desmond since I have access to a number of sources including books and catalogues. Desmond is a former art director from France who returned to New Zealand several years ago. He was supposed to submit the article, which he wrote (with my assistance for sources, which is why I kept a copy on my sandbox). So I am unclear how it was submitted in my name? where to from here? AndreaSG50 (talk) 22:56, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@AndreaSG50:. Who submits the draft for review isn't really that important in the ultimate scheme of things. If you're trying to help your friend by creating an article about him and you contacted Desmond123x to get him to try and help you do that, you're both probably are going to be considered to have a WP:COI with respect to the subject matter. However, that doesn't mean that either of you can't try to create such an article. The draft you submitted will be assessed on whether the subject matter meets Wikipedia:Notability (people). If the AfC reviewer assessing the draft feels that it does, the reviewer will approve the draft and move it to the article namespace; if they don't, they'll decline the draft and explain why they did so. Your COIs will only become an issue if either of you start to do things that aren't really in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If the draft is declined, you can continue to work on it and resubmit it again when you feel you've addressed the reasons why it's declined. As long as you continue to do such a thing in good faith and don't try to circumvent or game the process, you'll be fine. The only problem you might have may be due to WP:PAID; if there's any chance that PAID applies to either of you, then you need to follow the instructions of that page asap because that's one way you might end up blocked if either of you fail to do what's required.

The AfC process is intended to weed out any problems that might be the result of any connection a draft's creator may have with the subject of the draft, but creator's are given a bit of leeway to work on their draft at their own pace as long as they do so in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines; once something becomes an article, however, others expect COI editors you to use article's talk page to suggest changes per WP:PSCOI#Steps for engagement instead of directly editing the relevant articles themselves. So, this is what's likely going to be expected of the two of you or anyone else connected to Bunkley. So, some other things that the two of you (and perhaps Bunkley) might want to look at for reference are Wikipedia:Ownership of content, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Law of unintended consequences, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Dealing with articles about yourself and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. If an article is created about Bunkley, it will be something written about him in a neutral nammer that reflects what reliable sources are saying (good or bad) about him; it won't an article written for him or for his benefit. In other words, neither he nor his representatives (including friends and family) will have any form of final editorial control over article content. Once an article has been created, its content is going to be expected to comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines; editors might leave a draft alone (unless there are some clear problems that need fixing) out of deference to the draft's creator, but they won't likely do the same once the draft becomes an article. So, if Bunkley somehow feels that he'll be able to "control" article via others, then he's probably better off having something created on some place other that Wikipedia where he be able to exercise such control.

Finally, if you're in contact with Bunkley, please ask him to look at c:User talk:B.Bunkley to see some posts I left about some photos of his work he's uploaded. He needs to clarify a few things if he wants to prevent those photos from being deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

That all sounds reasonable. Thank you. AndreaSG50 (talk) 04:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, too. Desmond123x (talk) 05:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

MOS guidance on internal references such as "(see below)" in an article, beyond MOS:SELFREF

Is there stylistic guidance on when to repeat the same information in different places in an article, and when to use a pointer such as "(see below)" to defer discussion to a different section of the article? I found MOS:SELFREF but it is about something else. 73.89.25.252 (talk) 18:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. It might have helped had you given an example of what you were thinking about, but I would say that you should avoid repeating any information, except to point out that key elements of significance can be placed (uncited if you wish) within the lead, and then expanded upon further down in the article. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. Avoid using phrases like '(see below)' and content can change and be moved about, and such instructions become irrelevant. You use the word 'discussion', but I'm hoping that was just a clumsy choice of words as articles should be neutral, encyclopaedic and not discussive, though it can cite different reliable sources to show that one story sometimes has more than one side to it. I assume your concern relates to Julia Ioffe. I've not looked at it in detail, but keeping content succinct and relevant is a good aspiration. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

This originated from my question at Talk:Julia_Ioffe#Deferring_tweet_controversy_from_Politico_section. The article on Ioffe is currently structured with two sections that mention her viral tweet and consequent firing. The structure may be in need of change. But in its current form, the tweet episode is mentioned twice, and it's easier to get the nuances right in the longer section and put a "see below" in the shorter one. Hence the question. 73.89.25.252 (talk) 06:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Question about images

Hi there, I have uploaded a couple of images to Wikipedia Commons but when trying to put them on a page I am writing, it does not work. I am using sandbox in another language than English, any help? I believe the editing features of Wikipedia work the same in different languages. I am not sure why the images do not show. There is a red icon indicating an image but no real picture. Freshclover (talk) 04:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Freshclover, it looks to me that you forgot include the .jpg file extension. —teb728 t c 04:34, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

i.e. you wrote [[پرونده:Mina Dastgheib-youth|بندانگشتی]] it should be [[پرونده:Mina Dastgheib-youth.jpg|بندانگشتی]] —teb728 t c 05:01, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi again, Thanks Teb for the quick and correct answer to my question about uploading images. My second question is I have two pictures and Wikipedia is putting them on top of each other. How can I place them side-by-side to save space? Can I change the size? Freshclover (talk) 07:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Freshclover, I can't read Persian; does fa:ویکی‌پدیا:ساختار درج پرونده answer your question? —teb728 t c 07:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC) The English version is Wikipedia:Extended image syntax. —teb728 t c 07:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Creating a new article

I began to create an article on a famous Youtube Channel trending in my locality with over 5M Subscribers. I submitted the article for Wikipedia reviewing and got permission to edit even after submission. But I am unable to add a new topic to my Infobox Assassin7177 (talk) 06:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Assassin7177, I guess this is about Draft:Karikku? It's about a Youtube Channel, but it uses "Infobox YouTube personality", which is intended for use in articles about Youtube personalities. Maybe that's the cause of your problem. Maproom (talk) 06:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I have created a new article on a Youtube channel but have used a Youtube personality infobox. Can you tell me how to edit it and which one should i use as i have already submitted the draft for reviewing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assassin7177 (talk • contribs) 06:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Assassin7177: Template:Infobox YouTube personality is the correct infobox that you should be using for a Youtube channel, no matter if it's one or multiple people running the channel. Refer to the page linked to see all available parameters. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:33, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

So is my choice for infobox correct — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assassin7177 (talk • contribs) 08:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft + Question

Hello There,

I was wondering should Hurricane Epsilon have a page or not. Hurricane Paulette earlier this season has a draft and took a similar track to Epsilon. My draft page is here: Hurricane Epsilon. (There is 2, that one you click on goes to the other page. You will have to go into my contributions to see the page I edited).  Alphabet Genius (talk) 09:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Alphabet Genius, there is an ongoing discussion about this going on here. The page you linked was converted to a redirect per that discussion. Please don't attempt to recreate the page until consensus has been reached at the discussion, although you can work on the section at 2020 Atlantic hurricane season. Thanks, Giraffer ^munch 09:46, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Unable to edit software version

I am trying to update the software version of Mactracker. How can I update 7.8.2 to 7.9.6 and 4.3 to 4.5? 2001:B07:6442:8903:4065:C0EC:FD03:DD43 (talk) 10:33, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I'm afraid you have come to a help desk for people learning to edit Wikipedia, nothing else. You might find some answers if you ask at the Computing section of the Wikipedia Reference Desk. --ColinFine (talk) 10:40, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

There should be a plus symbol at the end of the infobox entry, you need to click that to be taken to a separate editing location. I've updated it. - X201 (talk) 11:09, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Subscription fee for Wikipedia

Is there a subscription fee for Wikipedia. Or will somebody help in correcting the content in wikipedia as a service. Are there any groups. Just asking. If so, how do they contribute.

How do corporates edit and update their content. And how about the historic content and scientific content.

Saver 99. TheSaver99 (talk) 09:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

TheSaver99 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a free to access encyclopedia of human knowledge, created for the benefit of humanity. There is no fee to access or participate here. The computers Wikipedia is on are operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization that accepts donations from people around the world to fund its operations so that access fees are not required. The vast majority of editors are here to contribute to this project because they believe in its mission or otherwise want to help out.

Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources state about subjects. Any addition beyond fixing spelling or grammar needs to have a citation to a reliable source, preferably one independent of the subject. Only what the sources says should be summarized, without conclusions being drawn.

Since you are asking about corporate edits, I assume that you represent a corporation. Corporate representatives need to review the conflict of interest and paid editing policies, for information on formal declarations they need to make. They should avoid making edits directly, but may make formal edit requests on article talk pages, or use Articles for Creation to draft articles for others to review. Often, corporate representatives find it difficult to participate here, because our goals are fundamentally different. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, TheSaver99. It's not entirely clear, but I get the impression that you are under the (common) misapprehension that Wikipedia is for people or companies to tell the world about themselves. It is not. An article (whether about a person, a company, a place, a school, a band, a book, a theory, or anything else) should be based almost entirely on what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about it. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject, or people closely associated with the subject, say or want to say about it. Such people (we refer to them as editors with a conflict of interest) are welcome to suggest changes to the article, using the edit request mechanism, but should not change the article directly, and their requests may or may not be carried out, depending on the judgment of uninvolved editors. --ColinFine (talk) 10:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

TheSaver99 If you are an employee of Laurus Labs you must comply with paid editing policies. This includes declaring such on your User page and not making any direct edits to the article. David notMD (talk) 13:24, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Translation of an Art-term

Hi, dear people, i hope someone here can read and understand German, as i have difficulties to translate this one term: "Parkettierung" or "Flächenfüllung" - in terms of art. The German wikipedia-article i'm referring to can be found here: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkettierung - i have no idea, which term in the english wikipedia would be right for this? (Background is Minimal art, Concrete art). --Gyanda (talk) 12:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

From Google translate (which is not fully correct), its tiling, how patterns are symmetrically laid out in a pattern, without overlapping.

In the mathematics called tiling (also tiling , paving or surface-circuit) the complete and non-overlapping coverage of the (Euclidean) plane by uniform patches. The concept can also be extended to higher dimensions.

But I'd get verification, just to be 110% certain. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 12:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I think it's Tessellation, Gyanda. --ColinFine (talk) 13:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much, ColinFine, i also translated it as tiling. And your link is exactly what i was searching for. Thanks again! --Gyanda (talk) 14:43, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

This seems correct. I just couldn't find the English counterpart. Why is it you were on the German article, anyways? Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:22, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I added info to a German wikipedia-article of mine, which is also in the English wikipedia, and i hesitated to update the article here, because i just couldn't figure out the English equivalence. Now i can start to add the info here as well. Thanks! --Gyanda (talk) 14:43, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

How to create a company Page?

I would like to create a company page for my organization for their presence in Wikipedia. What are the procedure to create a company page here? Ashumacs84 (talk) 10:19, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Ashumacs84, don't. Your company page will inevitably sound promotional, because you have a conflict-of-interest. The page will most likely get deleted. If you company is notable, another Wikipedian will create a page on it. Thanks, Giraffer ^munch 11:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Ashumacs84, please study WP:PAID and make necessary disclosures, then study WP:NORG and find reliable sources that meet the criteria. After evaluating the sources you have, if you believe your organisation still deserves an article, you can go through the WP:Article wizard which will guide you through the steps, at the end of which you will create a WP:DRAFT. When your draft is ready, you may submit it for review by WP:AFC reviewers who will either accept your draft or decline it with further guidance on how to do better. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:33, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Please review my edit request

A couple of days ago I participated on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Banaphar with realible sources , so that change can happen and or I get general consensus to make changes, but unfortunately it doesn't saw by any administrator until now. So please check my edit request. Eroberar (talk) 06:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Please be patient. This is not an urgent issue, and it is a slightly complex post to respond to. (I can say immediately that you will not get a consensus to make those edits yourself.) You do not need an administrator to respond, by the way. --bonadea contributions talk 06:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I've just responded. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

◢  Ganbaruby!  thanks sir for responding in my edit request and I put more sources as you say. Sir, is there any administrator who can understand Hindi language, they can help a lot.

Eroberar, there are a few admins from India at least some of whom I assume know Hindi, but I recommend WT:INDIA if you need help. You don't need admins most of your time on Wikipedia, and if you do, those admins do watch that page. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:43, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Drone Racing League Comment

Since I am now, I cannot revert the damage done to this article. I was wondering if someone else can please?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_Racing_League

The person who did this also only has one edit.

Thanks SirEucalyptus (talk) 16:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

SirEucalyptus,  Fixed, thanks. Dylsss^{(talk • contribs)} 17:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Source

Hello! I have a source called Cinema Cats (here is the home page [3]). It is a self described blog [4] and there is no evidence that the information that is posted on it is reviewed or checked for reliability. I don’t think this would be considered a reliable source for information about movies or cats, but I just thought I’d stop by and check! Thank you in advance for your comments. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 17:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Lima Bean Farmer, WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard may be of user to you. Regards, Giraffer ^munch 17:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Lima Bean Farmer: I think, straight off, that's not a reliable source. Hardly worth bothering the folks over at WP:RSN. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, well at least they can take a look at it and have precedent. Thank you for checking! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:06, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Lima Bean Farmer: It's a one-man band, blog-cum-homemade website. I'm pretty darned sure nobody is going to accept that. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Pages

How long does it take for your page to go public? I haven't received a notification that Wikipedia is reviewing the page. Jkeller70 (talk) 17:36, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

You never submitted the page for review, and even if you did it would be summarily declined. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 17:46, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link User:Jkeller70/sandbox TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:53, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

AND, the same information is on your User page. Please delete all of it. A User page is for a description of your intentions and experiences as a Wikipedia editor. David notMD (talk) 18:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Declinable, by the way, because no references. From what is in the draft now, no expectation that it can meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. David notMD (talk) 18:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

How can you find your own Sandbox?

 Hurricanestudier123 (talk) 18:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Can you help me find Hurricanestudier123: Sandbox?

If you are using the desktop version, there is a link to "Sandbox" at the top of your browser window. If it's red, then you haven't created it, just click on it to edit it. Another way to get to it is by clicking on Special:MyPage/Sandbox or typing that in the search Wikipedia box on any Wikipedia page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:52, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I just created it, at User:Hurricanestudier123/sandbox as expected. Maproom (talk) 18:54, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

List of big bands

This alpha listing looks fairly complete, but should it also include Louis Prima and his orchestra? Bobhope2000 (talk) 19:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Bobhope2000, welcome to the Teahouse. It would appear from the Louis Prima article that he used the big band format for a while, so it might well be worth including in the list. I would encourage you to be bold and make such additions, but be prepared that others might disagree, so always be prepared to back your reasoning with reliable sources. Regards, Zindor (talk) 19:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

How do I change nickname colors?

I noticed some users, have different color text on their signatures. I tried doing the same but I don't know how to do it properly because it won't work. Anyone know how to do this? Toad62 (talk) 17:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Toad62: Check this out Wikipedia:Signatures. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:52, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Timtempleton:This didn't help, but thanks for trying to help me. I will just leave my username as it is. Toad62 (talk) 20:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Toad62:Are you sure? You have to read down to Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing your signature And you can indent your responses by adding a ":". Multiple colons indent even further. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

Can you add Far left activist group for antifa, the same for proud boys. 50.192.176.217 (talk) 20:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. I'm not exactly sure what it is that you're asking, but because this is a general editing help desk, rather than a place to make specific suggestions for article improvements, you are better making specific suggestions on the talk page(s) of the relevant article(s). Please include a url or reference to a Reliable Source if you hope to have content changed based upon your suggestions. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Need help - IJR

Hello,

Can someone please re-consider this proposed change here. Thank you. 75.99.252.66 (talk) 20:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

The place to discuss this is on the article talk page itself, whereas The Teahouse is a general help desk for people needing assistance with how to edit. Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

OSS project

Hi. I would love to create a new page about OSS project I am interested in. It would be faster for me if I clone and mimic the style of one of the other similar pages. Is there a way to do that, or is there a good guide on creating a new page on Wikipedia. Thanks in advance. Sasa krsmanovic (talk) 15:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Click this hyperlink Wikipedia:YFA. It will give you a template on how to create an article, and the core principles. Good luck! Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sasa krsmanovic, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would add to what Le Panini has said that I would advise not even thinking about the format of the article until you have looked for and found the independent reliably published sources that are absolutely required. I appreciate you don't want to spend more time than you need to, but if you do not start by finding the sources to establish that the project meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then there is a chance that any work you put into it will be wasted anyway. --ColinFine (talk) 20:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Problem when adding URL to an Article

When I insert the following URL as part of a final reference in the text (using the cite web template) in the John James Wilson article

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/191594745/john-james-wilson

I get the following warning

Warning: Commons category does not match the Commons sitelink on Wikidata - please check (this message is shown only in preview)

What is the problem? Can I use the URL?

}} BFP1 (talk) 13:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@BFP1: this warning is unrelated to your URL. Howewer, Find a Grave is not considered a reliable source, so it will likely dont help you anyway. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Thanks @Victor Schmidt:.That's very helpful. Following your useful link, it does indicate Wikipedia may accept that Find a Grave may be included as an external link if there is a useful picture such as of a gravestone. It says the following.

As an external link: Nota bene Rarely. Sometimes, a link is acceptable because of a specific, unique feature or information that is not available elsewhere, such as valuable images of a grave.

As there is an image of a grave,I will try including the source as an external link.

@Victor Schmidt: Unfortunately with the URL now in 'External links' there is still the following warning

Warning: Commons category does not match the Commons sitelink on Wikidata - please check (this message is shown only in preview)

Can anybody help?BFP1 (talk) 16:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@BFP1: The problem was that the Commons category name in the {{Commons category-inline}} template—John James Wilson (marine painter)—did not match the Commons category name in the Wikidata item for the painter—John James Wilson (artist). I've made this edit so that the warning will no longer appear to anyone previewing changes to the article. (The underlying problem is that Commons appears to have two different categories for the same artist. I'll see if I can get that resolved.) Deor (talk) 18:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Deor: for making sense of the puzzle and hopefully providing a remedy.BFP1 (talk) 21:13, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Question regarding page previews and entries

Whenever you hover your mouse over a blue term in a Wikipedia article, a page preview pops up with the opening words of the first paragraph, and sometimes a picture. However, for some articles, the opening picture does not show up in this page preview (example, Captain America). Is there a way to edit the pictures that show up on page previews? Likewise, the same problem applies when typing entries into the Wikipedia homepage (wikipedia.org). Some suggestions have the picture on the left side, some just have that gray box. Is there a way to edit this to where the first picture in the article always appears? I hope my questions make sense... TNstingray (talk) 22:37, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi TNstingray. The image selection is controlled by the PageImages algorithm: more info can be found here. Non-free images don't display in previews, so that'll be why the image doesn't show up for Captain America. Regards, Zindor (talk) 23:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia suppression of information about Hunter Biden -- even on TALK pages

So I posted a link on a talk page to a NY Post article that includes a picture of Joe and Hunter Biden with oligarchs from Kazakhstan. My post was removed and I lost editing rights on the talk page. What did I do wrong? Michael-Ridgway (talk) 23:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Talk:Hunter_Biden @Michael-Ridgway: What makes you think you are blocked from the talk page? You just posted there not long ago and got a reply that you are posting old information. Additionally, you should not use the New York Post as a source. According to WP:RSN "There is consensus that the New York Post is generally unreliable. A tabloid newspaper, editors criticise its lack of concern for fact-checking or corrections, including a number of examples of outright fabrication." RudolfRed (talk) 00:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Nothing, I guess, other than the fact that the edit link to the page was gone making it impossible for me to post anything on the page from that point forward. Michael-Ridgway (talk) 00:52, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit Restrictions

Are there any restrictions on how long your edits are? Palpatine84 (talk) 20:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Palpatine84: No, as long as they are properly done. There is a character limit to edit summaries, but it's quite long. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Palpatine84: There is no limit, but often a series of small edits may be better than one large edit. If another editor does not agree with your edit, they can revert it. If you do several small edits, then only one of those might be reverted. But with a large edit the whole thing would be reverted.RudolfRed (talk) 21:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Palpatine84: there is also an issue that after too long with the edit screen open, Wikipedia starts having a risk of timing out. You only have to lose a very long edit once to decide to save more frequently in the future Nosebagbear (talk) 22:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Palpatine84: There are some technical limits on article size, so I guess technically if an article is 10 bytes less than the limit and you add a paragraph, you will cause problems. These limits are rarely encountered, but if you want to test them, please do it in your personal sandbox at Special:MyPage/Sandbox, not in the main encyclopedia. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Palpatine84. Although there don't seem to be any hard fast limits in places, I think, as the others above have pointed out, you have to use a little common sense and self-assess how the edit affects the article over all. If you try to rewrite an entire article (which is already fairly well-developed) in a single edit, there is a good chance that the changes you make are going to be too much for other editors to figure out at once. So, it might be better to break things up into smaller edits or even be WP:CAUTIOUS instead to give others a chance to look things over and ofter some feedback. At the same time, there's no need to make lots edits to fix the same obvious spelling or grammar errors in a article, if you can do them all at once. You have to sort of find a balance, and they way you do that is simply by editing more and seeing how people respond. You're not going to please everyone. Some people find editors who make lots of little minor edits consecutively to the same article within a few minutes of each other a bit annoying, especially if everything could've been done in one edit; others, other the hand, like smaller, easier to understand edits because it makes things easier to follow and cleanup if needed without have to revert lots of other content which might be a problem. You're probably going to be OK as long as you don't give others the impression that you're trying to boost your edit count for some reason by making lots of small edits for just the sake of making an edit. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Green Times New Roman text used on talk pags

When text on talk pages is specifically modified to be green and in the Times New Roman (or similar) font, what meaning does this convey? Beaneater (talk) 14:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC) Beaneater (talk) 14:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse! If you see a different text/format on talk pages, most probably it's a template. If you want further clarification, you might want to link this talkpage(s) next time. _Signed,Benjamin Borg ^(Talk) 15:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

One place I saw such text was at [[5]], although I have also seen it in other places. Beaneater (talk) 15:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

It's {{tq|<text>}}. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 16:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Beaneater00, to answer your question, it indicates a direct quote. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:14, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Beaneater00: It depends on the page. If it's a help or other documentation page (not an article), we have templates that are used to color "good" examples green ({{xt}}) and "bad" examples red ({{!xt}}) (e.g., the table at MOS:BADDATE). Is that what you mean? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:59, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I believe that is what I had seen. Thank you. Beaneater (talk) 02:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Request AfD / WP:SIGCOV advice

I am interested in maintenance tasks, and consequently have lately been participating in AfD discussions. Most have been pretty straightforward.

However, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Majid_Ali_Jaunpuri has me bowled. I have not voted in the discussion, but based on my reading of WP:SIGCOV. But a bunch of editors seem fairly content with the sourcing. Therefore, I seek some guidance in this matter - not necessarily on how to vote in this matter (I am fine not voting in this AfD at all), but rather so that I understand the standard of sigificant coverage as I continue to participate in future AfDs.

I want to clarify that this is not an attempt at lobbying/campaigning either for or against deletion of this article - I am genuinely seeking advice on WP policy. — Ad Meliora ^Talk∕_Contribs 13:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

The online sources in the article are few, and they aren't highly cited in the article. Citation 4 supports a single sentence, and is thus used, similarly Citation 5 supports the fact that a notable scholar was his student, and is thus used.

Coming to the major sources of this article,al-Ilām bi man fī Tārīkh al-Hind min al-Ālām al-musamma bi Nuzhat al-Khawātir wa Bahjat al-Masāmi wa an-Nawāzir by Abdul Hai Hasani has significant details about the subject, similarly Tārīkh Darul Uloom Deoband has significant details about the subject. The monthly journal citation, although significant, but is improperly cited, has significant coverage about the subject. The information in the Nuzhat al-Khawātir, a widely known book, has enough information about the subject. We do not just see online available sources. Your statement the one sentence mentions of the subject in the cited documents are passing mentions is completely wrong about the offline sources. I remember reading about this scholar, in a journal published in Delhi, but sadly I do not have access to that right now. The sources in this article completely demonstrate notability, if not GNG, then the SNG.─ The Aafī (^talk) 13:41, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, TheAafi but I am not seeking to further discuss the issue here - you are already participating in the deletion discussion, and I hope you will continue to do so there. In this particular forum, I am seeking the advice of Teahouse hosts on WP:SIGCOV. Thank you. — Ad Meliora ^Talk∕_Contribs 14:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ad Meliora: I'm not a Teahouse house (came here semi-randomly) but also not a participant in the AFD. While you're right that we shouldn't relitigate the AFD heer, The Aafi's comments seems to get to the heart of the issue, and is likely partly why you may be confused. You said "I feel that the one sentence mentions of the subject in the cited documents are passing mentions, and don't rise to the level of significant coverage" but The Aafi suggests several sources have way more than a single sentence. It's possible these sources aren't currently used in the article, but demonstrating WP:NOTABILITY only really requires evidence that they exist not that they are used in the article. In other words, while you may be right that a small number of single sentence mentions will not be enough to demonstrate significant coverage, more substantial coverage may be. E.g. I read a whole page for one source which while in some ways not much in a long book etc, is still way more than a single sentence. Remember also that reliable sources don't have to be online nor do they have to be in English. They don't even have to be particularly recent although very old sources may not be reliable, given the standards of scholarship, human knowledge at the time, etc. And we quite welcome articles about subjects only well known in some small predominantly non English speaking region, provided that the reliable source coverage is present. (And as said before, even if that coverage is in obscure non English publications provided of course that said publications are reliable.) Nil Einne (talk) 03:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

Is their a hot topic tag that I can use to place on articles that are subject to great debate on both sides. BigRed606 (talk) 03:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@BigRed606: Depends on what kind of "hot topic" you're talking about. Do you have a specific article in mind? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I think Template:Controversial is what you're looking for. It should be placed on the article's talk page rather than the article itself, however. -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

How should I be part of the tasks. Especially something on Dravidanadu or Southern India which has a rich past

Dear Wiki Foundation or team,

How should I be part of the tasks. Escpecially somthing on Dravidanadu or Southern India which has a rich past. Can I start a subject and invite people. Dravidanadu is now known as South India. It is geographically, culturally, Linguistacally, anthropologically different from the Northern Regions. As there is very less information available, can we have a task to update or start that task.

Saver 99. TheSaver99 (talk) 10:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, TheSaver99. Have you looked at Dravida Nadu? - I realise this is not the same thing as you are talking about, but the "Background" section and the navigation box at the right may have links that are useful. Perhaps WP:WikiProject India would also be a good place to look. --ColinFine (talk) 10:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, a WikiProject is definitely the way to go for something like this. Wikipedia:WikiProject Dravidian civilizations seems like it might be just what you're looking for. It doesn't seem very active, but it's easier than starting from scratch at least. -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Sneh Upadhya Draft

Hi,

yesterday, I submitted bhojpuri singer's profile for review. she is very famous. but, I got declined. could anyone explain how I can make that page live? her name is sneh upadhya. check if she is suitable for wiki page.

awaiting for response. 112.196.185.54 (talk) 05:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Sneh Upadhya currently cites no references, though it does list some. You need to read Help:Referencing for beginners.   Maproom (talk) 06:46, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you for the invitation to the teahouse. I look forward to participating more with Wikipedia. In terms of photos shared, I see there is a menu on the left which probably contains the answer to this question. When it comes to sharing photos about a regional conflict, there seems to be the necessity to have copyright-free photos but yet the need for a reputable source. I've found some photos from reputable, online sources such as news outlets, yet these photos may have full or limited copyright protection. If a photo is from one of the regional representatives or from individual, independent photographers, then there are grounds for refusal to include because it may not be considered to be from an unbiased source. Is this correct? Best regards & thanks! SacredForest (talk) 06:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi SacredForest. You can find out some more general information on how to upload and use photo or other images in articles at Wikipedia:Image use policy, but basically there are two aspects that need to be resolved. The first aspect is the licensing of the file you want to upload and the second aspect is how you intend to use the file.

The first aspect is important because Wikipedia only accepts photos, etc. which meet its licensing requirements regardless of how you intend to use it. Anything considered to be a copyright violation or otherwise not in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines related to images is likely not going to be allowed.

The second aspect is important because images should be contextually relevant to the articles they're added to and should actually improve (or at least not detract from) the reader's understanding of the article. Sometimes this is not always so clear and editors might not agree on whether adding a particular image is an improvement; in such cases, it often takes a WP:CONSENSUS established via article talk page discussion to resolve things, regardless of the image's licensing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft article

Can I let others work on a draft article that I'm working on? The article is Draft:Interstate 42. Cwater1 (talk) 00:11, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Not only can you let them, but you can't really stop them, assuming they don't break any normal Wikipedia rules. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:12, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Cwater1. Wikipedia pages aren't really WP:OWNed by their creators; so, as davidwr points out, anyone can techinically edit the draft you're working on. However, more experienced editors will often refrain from editing drafts out of deference to their creators unless they feel there's an obvious policy or guideline issue that needs addressing asap or there some things which can be cleaned up without being too obtrusive. Experienced editors seem to generally avoid trying to "take over" a draft because doing so can sometimes create bad will among editors. Even though the goal of all involved should be to create the best article possible for Wikipedia, people are people and editors can sometimes get a bit possessive and protective of their work. New editors, in particular, who are not quite yet used to how things are done on Wikipedia often take quite personally when they log in to find their previous efforts completely re-written or outright removed by other editors. Since drafts aren't really articles yet, creators tend to given a little more leeway to make mistakes and more of an opportunity to fix these mistakes themselves. Anyway, if you're working on a draft and find yourself stuck, you can feel free to ask others to help. In fact, that most likely is a better approach than simply waiting around an hoping someone shows up on their own to pitch in. Try asking for feedback at a WikiProject which might cover the subject area; in this case, that would probably be Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

People can come in and edit if they so choose to. Keep note, though, that everyone (most people) has the goal to make articles better, even if it goes against your intentions or viewpoint. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 00:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

From past observations, asking at Teahouse for other editors to look at a draft sometimes results in the draft getting a lot shorter. Can be unsettling to the person who asked for a look. David notMD (talk) 07:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Requesting volunteering in clean up support

Hi,

There is one article Sindh Police which needs update in view of some recent notable incidence but present status of the article seems not too good shape to add new info. Since I am focusing largely on different topics It's not possible for me to devote time for clean up aspect,

Can some one volunteer for article clean up?

Bookku (talk) 05:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Bookku: There are WP:NODEADLINES per se when it comes to editing so you can try and clean things up in that particular article when you have the time. You can be WP:BOLD and make the necessary changes yourself, or you can be WP:CAUTIOUS and discuss them on the article's talk page first. You can also try and get assistance from the members of the WikiProjects listed at the top of Talk:Sindh Police. Your post was a bit vague on what things you think need to be cleaned up, but one thing I noticed is that the various images of tables being used almost certainly need to be replaced per WP:TEXTASIMAGES. How this is best done probably should be discussed on the article's talk page, but bascially replacing the images with actual Wikitables should work. Even better would be to replace the directories of each department's personnel with reliably sourced prose content about each department instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse

Hello Teahouse, I have a few question(s). A really nice Wiki-Editor referred me here. I am new to Wikipedia and WikiMedia. I am pretty Techy but I have a lot to learn when it comes to the Wikipedia environment. I have only been here for a few days and within 24 hours I was indefinitely blocked from two pages that contain content in regards to myself, my film and my company, for COI, which I did not know was a Wiki-violation, as I was, (still am), new to Wikipedia. Once I learn the rules I follow them. But unfortunately in the outside world I am experiencing a cyber-crime on my name and 64 articles over eight years on my work, almost 64 DMCA take-downs/media stories of my work it seems. I have hired a Digital Forensics Detective to investigate it but alas that is nonetheless. What prompted me to create a Wikipedia account is that the Wikipedia page that was up on my work on the Internet was removed. I am a Film-Maker, produced a film with 42 Star Trek Stars in it plus a soundtrack. I created an account and figured out how to undo this "take-down" action. Ever since I made the 'undo' edit, daily, I have wiki editors seemingly attacking me and or the edits I made on Wikipedia, and as I was making a edits, Wikipedia prompted me to "keep on going" and I did. Truly thought I was doing the correct thing, I inserted the facts. Now there are dates that are incorrect on this mentioned Wikipedia page. Someone removed the fact that I have fought in court, stood up for the rights of my dear friend, Nichelle Nichols in an Elder Abuse situation she has endured, with media references. A Wiki-Editor removed two photos that I uploaded to WikiMedia even though I in actuality own the copyright to these two mentioned photos. Every day another Wiki Editor is making a change to this mentioned page. This does not seem fair and I really believed that Wikpedia was the most upright on the internet, that folks that edit here quote facts not fiction, I know no one is perfect but it does seem that daily I am being harassed, is it because of my race/skin color, my gender, the Elder Abuse case I standing up for? I am not sure. My question is, is this usual that a page would be edited on a daily basis? There is more to this situation clearly but I was directed to you again by a Wiki Editor who actually cared to help me find my way within Wikipedia by providing links and sharing their knowledge as to how to navigate through this environment. Humbly I believe when one is less than 24 hours new to a site and to have adversarial notes and emails sent to you definitely deters new users and I'd imagine other editors as well. And everyone is new at something so why not help people out rather than admonish them? Personally I support people in my company especially when they are new so everyone can enjoy their experience. Is this too idealistic for Wikipedia? I am not sure. But any thoughts, guidance or opinions (if opinions are allowed here), that anyone may like to or care to provide I'd be grateful for, as as much as I value facts and information in which I can also add to other pages on Wikipedia, I am definitely deterred and almost to the point where I may close this account but I also stand up for myself as well. Again thankful for anyone's help. I trying to get things right and I and also trying to understand if I am not understanding. And I acknowledge and am grateful for the nice helpful people here as I have now 'online-met' two. Thank you so much for your time.TryMe99 (talk) 00:55, 22 October 2020 (UTC)TryMe99 TryMe99 (talk) 00:55, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

note to others: this is referring primarily to the article Angelique Fawcette

Hi TryMe99 - I'm sorry this experience has been your introduction to Wikipedia. Navigating the various policies and guidelines here is complex enough for a new user as it is, and when you choose to write an article about a living person that you have a close real-life connection to, even more complex policies come into play (WP:BLP and WP:COI, respectively). This is why writing such articles as a new user is strongly discouraged. So I can definitely understand why you feel like you're being personally attacked and/or treated unfairly here. That being said, I can assure you that nothing going on here is actually unusual, just confusing, and you're certainly not being targeted due to your race or gender. And assuming good faith on the part of other editors is a core tenet of how people are expected to behave here, so the fact that you're making such accusations is certainly a part of why things haven't been going smoothly for you.

To address some of your specific points:

• You owning the copyright on a photo is not in and of itself enough for it to be ok to be used here. You first have to officially release it under a license that removes all copyright and licensing restrictions, even allowing commercial use. If you are willing to do that, follow the instructions here, being careful not to neglect the "Licensing your file" part. See here for more info on licensing and acceptable licenses for Wikipedia. And if the photo in question is this one, then it seems that Getty Images owns the copyright and not you, which would certainly be an issue.
• I think the removal of the Nichelle Nichols information was in part a mistake by that editor, but I can see why it happened. First of all, the source provided doesn't actually support the claim it was directly attached to, that "Fawcette garnered support from Kerri Kasem and her Elder Abuse Foundation Kasem Cares." That information appears nowhere in the article. An additional problem with that source is that much of it consists of Fox News simply repeating claims made by Fawcette herself. For the purposes of Wikipedia at least, that means that the claims simply come from Fawcette herself rather than from Fox News's reporting - i.e. that article would not qualify as a reliable source that verifies those claims. We are especially vigilant about such things when it comes to information that might be seen as defamatory toward a living person (in this case, Nichols's son) - see Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident if you're curious why. BUT, the paragraph that begins with "According to August 2018 court documents obtained by People magazine, Fawcette objected to Johnson’s petition to be named Nichols’ conservator" does NOT rely on statements Fawcette made herself, so the fact that Fawcette was involved in that case (though not the part about her and Nichols being "friends") IS well supported by that article. I'll bring it up on the article's talk page, and re-add it if there is consensus to do so.
• It is quite usual, and in fact desirable, that pages you create will be regularly edited by others. See WP:OWN. This is all the more true for new articles that have clear issues with certain Wikipedia guidelines, as yours did.

Hopefully that helps to clear some things up. Things aren't usually quite THIS confusing here, but you have to understand that by creating an article about a living person you're close to as your very first act on Wikipedia, you've done the equivalent of diving straight into the deep end without learning to swim first. I would suggest taking a step back from this particular issue until you have a stronger grasp of core Wikipedia principles - The Wikipedia Adventure is a great starting point. I think you'll find that we're not so bad after all. Feel free to respond with any follow-up questions! -Elmer Clark (talk) 06:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Elmer Clark Thank you so much for your reply and for taking the time to write all of this, to explain the situation and for including the links. I sincerely appreciate it. It has been a 4-Day rocky Journey. Just a note, I did 'not' create a Wikipedia page for myself or my film, these pages went up I observed after we obtained Distribution for our film and after we had the actual real virtual premiere (due to Covid) with Snoop Dogg leading the film on August 1, 2020 versus the non-public Sneak-Peak premiere in 2016 at the Mann's Chinese Theater - 50th Anniversary Day of Star Trek. Otherwise, yes, by you sharing all of this I do believe there are a group of kind people here as you are providing me with facts and direction and yes, when we are new, sigh, it is challenging and given all of the turmoil that we (I) as Black people have to go through just to live and exist I was truly concerned that this was an issue as well. Thank you and the other Wiki-Editor who referred me here for explaining to me otherwise. And yes, I will take your advice and step back in hopes that the facts will go up accurately. Thank you for making the other correction that you mentioned I appreciate that as well. On the outside world, outside of Wikipedia, we all take Wikipedia as "the real truth", it is not social media, but rather we can come here for accuracy and thus can make decisions, business, personal or simply educational decisions off of what we read here. Don't know what more to say but thank you, I will step back and just read the guidelines when I can, in between work and time. Thanks so much again and have an enjoyable day. TryMe99 (talk) 07:11, 22 October 2020 (UTC)TryMe99

Just a comment that Wikipedia, like any encyclopedia, tends to be a trailing indicator to "the real truth." Especially for living people and for fast-changing current events (COVID, etc.) Wikipedia requires references to content published in reliable sources, and will not accept what-I-know-to-be-true. This can even extend to what a person says about themselves and others in an interview. Furthermore, the conflict of interest and paid rules of Wikipedia can be mysterious and even vindictive-feeling, whereas those are policies that evolved over time to achieve a transparent and neutral point of view. The best recourse to having content being reverted is to participate in a discussion on the Talk page of the article in question. David notMD (talk) 08:21, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Help me improve my article

Draft:Karikku is my article that has been sent for reviewing. Can the experts here help me improve it by giving me appropriate suggestions and advises. Assassin7177 (talk) 04:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

An editor left suggestions as a comment. Comply with those. David notMD (talk) 08:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

A question

At User talk:chicdat#"intense lack of supporting here", I tried to put a pin on a few days ago so Lowercase sigmabot III doesn't archive it. But yet he archived it. Then I un-archived the discussion and put another pin on. Did I do it wrong or something. Thanks, 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 12:06, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Chicdat. Sorry you've had to wait so long for a reply. Your problem is that you've actually set a ridiculously short time period (7 days) before the bot comes along and archives everything within it. That's far too soon to be sensible for a low-traffic talk page like yours. It's your choice, but I'd change it to 60 days or more, and increase the max size of your archive from 50k to something that won't (in due course) result in you having myriads of little archives to wade through. I prefer one easy-to-view talk page going back a reasonable length of time, so my own settings are to archive old posts after 90 days, and to have archives of 100k. See User:MiszaBot/config for changing your settings. See also this instruction within that page for retaining a specific thread indefinitely, or for some predetermined length of time. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Sure! 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 10:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Have I submitted my article for review correctly?

Hi - I'm not sure if I've submitted my draft for review... I pressed the big blue 'submit your draft for review' button in my Sandbox... how do I know if it's worked... I assumed I'd get a message to say it had been submitted. Am I doing something wrong? Ruthhenrietta (talk) 16:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 16:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I've submitted it for you. For reference, put {{subst:submit}} at the top of the article to submit it. Happy editing! Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks User:Le Panini - it's a bit weird there are no instructions to say you have to do that... and that the big blue button doesn't do it! For a newbie like me, that's really confusing... Ruthhenrietta (talk) 08:42, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is hard to pick up at first, but don't let that scare you. "Publish changes" just publishes the recent changes, it doesn't bring the article to the main article sections. When you're ready for it, that's when you'd put {{subst:submit}} for initial review, and if the article meets the criteria, it will move from the draftspace to the mainspace. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 10:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Ryan Avery (speaker)

Hi Everyone,

I need help. What do you suggest if I want to create an article about Ryan Avery, a famous US speaker, in Wikipedia. Currently, his name is the same with Ryan Avery, lacrosse player but I've read that Wikipedia favors more on notable people. I've tried to create one a few times but it got deleted as I am also new to this Wikipedia thing. I have been learning a lot from this speaker and would like to make a contributions for him. I hope someone could help me. Thank you in advance contributors. Azumi121 (talk) 02:13, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Your list of contributions shows next to nothing that's independent of one Ryan Avery or another. So first, familiarize yourself with Wikipedia by improving other articles. Once you've done this, ensure that your Avery is notable by Wikipedia's criteria. (See Wikipedia:Notability (people).) If he is, then read and digest WP:YFA. If that sounds OK, ask RHaworth (who deleted it) to restore Draft:Ryan Avery (speaker). (You may need to say more than that you want to restart work on it. In your request, provide clear evidence for notability.) If you get it, start editing it by cutting out the junk and adding clear evidence of notability. Then improve it as a whole. When you think it's ready, propose its promotion from draft to article. -- Hoary (talk) 04:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much Hoary.. I'll try your suggestion of asking the one who deleted it to restore draft for Ryan Avery. And you are correct. I should read more and get familiarize with Wikipedia.. Azumi121 (talk)

@Azumi121: It looks like you have repeatedly changed the existing article about the lacrosse player to remove content about that person and add content about the speaker. That is never appropriate (and you have received a lot of information and a couple of warnings about that on your user talk page, as well as here). Your comment above, I've read that Wikipedia favors more on notable people looks as if you are still thinking that the other article should be removed in favour of the person you think is more notable, but that is not correct. Ignore the article about the lacrosse player (who is definitely notable), don't move it to another title and don't change its content. If the speaker is in fact notable, there can be an article about him in addition to the one about the lacrosse player. --bonadea contributions talk 06:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback bonadea. I appreciate it. It's true I made a couple of revisions and it's really because I haven't done my research and was trying only what I think I should do at that time. That's why I am asking here now on how to do it properly. I'll try to improve other articles first and request removal of deletion of Avery's draft so I can work on it again. Thank you again for the contribution. Azumi121 (talk) 12:18, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Azyhk cave

Article about Azykh cave.This is totally armenian propaganda. "The Azokh Cave or Azykh Cave (Azerbaijani: Azıx mağarası, is a six-cave complex known as a habitation site of prehistoric humans. It lies near to the village of Azokh in Artsakh, Armenia. This cave and the surrounded villages are historic land of Armenia" Grammatical errors, to say that Azykh cave is in Armenia and to show a map of Armenia, to write that Nagorno-Karabakh is in Armenia, do not say that the word azykh means bear in Turkic, there is nothing about etymology. What nation and state existed in prehistory ? and this territory became Armenian territory?What does it mean to destroy an article about the oldest cave in the former USSR and the 1st in the Caucasus, and the 4th oldest cave in the world? Blaxoul (talk) 12:22, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Blaxoul, questions like this belong on the talk page of the article. If you get little response, post a link at the talk pages of the relevant WikiProjects. Is there anything I can help you with regarding editing Wikipedia? Zindor (talk) 12:38, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Blaxoul: In questions regarding territorial claims, Wikipedia generally goes what the international community and the UN say, which means that your point did have merit. That article sees a lot of edit warring from anonymous or newly registered editors who try to change it to reflect their own nationalist point of view (not a single point of view – both sides contribute to this!) However, even though the edit you made to Azokh Cave removed some inappropriate phrasing, it also removed a lot more including most of the infobox, and so it did not look constructive on the face of it, as the editor who reverted you also said. I have restored an earlier, stable version of the article which I believe represents the view held by most of the international community. I also want to thank you for not simply reverting back to your preferred version, and instead coming here to ask about it – as Zindor points out, the talk page of the article would also have been a good place to put your comments, and in general it is better to keep specific content questions to article talk pages. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Bonadea thanks for following up on this. I had to get back to work off-wiki. There's the start of a discussion on my talk page, but it's nothing pressing yet. Zindor (talk) 13:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Help with submitting an article

Hello everyone, Im trying to create an english article for this company which a wiki page in hebrew of it exists: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%91%D7%95%D7%A6%D7%AA_CGI

I got declined once again. in the first time they told that i need to add reliable resources regarding this company - which i did. In the second time they told that i need to make notable changes before I submit it or my article might be deleted. Therefore, i wish to ask for advice about what changes should I make in order for the submission to be accepted. Furthermore, i wish to ask for advice about the conflict of interest.

Here is the article so far:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:CGI_Group The CGI GROUP.[1], founded in 1989, specializes in providing strategic counseling and added value services to the business and commercial sector.

In August 2018, Yaakov Peri the former head of the Shin Bet and the Minister of Science, Technology and Space had appointed president of the firm. Activity In November 2018, CGI Group found a recording, in which the former president of Georgia is planning to murder one of the key people in the governing party in Georgia.

According to CGI Group, the former president of Georgia, Mikheil Saakashvili, had planned to hire an assassin in order to murder the leader of the governing party, Bidzina Ivanishvili[2]

In December 2019, CGI Group, has been hired to help find the 18th century jewels and diamonds stolen in a heist from the Dresden Green Vault museum in November 2019. The German media called the daring robbery, "the largest robbery of historic jewels in modern Germany.[3]

In January 2020, the israeli firm received several letters offering to sell them two of the stolen jewelery. The CGI Group says its investigators were offered the items via the dark web.[4]

References

"CGI GROUP". www.cgi.co.il. Retrieved 2020-10-20.
"Israeli company uncovers assassination plot in Georgian election". Ynetnews. 2018-11-25. Retrieved 2020-10-20.
"Peri's CGI Group hired to find stolen Dresden jewelry". Globes. 2019-09-12. Retrieved 2020-10-20.
"Grünes Gewölbe: Staatsanwalt im Urlaub, Hinweise blieben liegen". bild.de (in German). Retrieved 2020-10-20.

External Links Official Website Yairhay (talk) 08:27, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Yairhay, and welcome to the Teahouse! Your article was declined because it didn't satisfy our notability guidelines for companies (see this and this).

Everything on Wikipedia needs to be cited to a reliable source, and the majority of them should be secondary. They (the sources) also need to go into detail about the subject of your article, not just mention them. None of your sources do this. If there are no more reliable, independent (secondary) sources that cover your subject, then your topic may not be suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. If there are, then add them!

Regarding your COI, place {{UserboxCOI|1=Draft:CGI Group}} on your userpage and that should be sufficient. Giraffer ^munch 08:40, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much. First, this article has been approved in the past by wikipedia but it's in hebrew. all i want is to translate it to english. Second, there are more detailed sources but most of them are in hebrew (because it's an israeli firm) do you think it may help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yairhay (talk • contribs) 08:10, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Yairhay, sources can be in any language but different language wikipedias are independent projects with their respective standards, so the fact that the hebrew wikipedia has an article doesn't automatically mean that the article would be accepted here. The organisation has to meet WP:NORG. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Label question

Is it possible to create a label for the tops of articles that reads:"This article is in the process of being rewritten to fit a neutral point of view" or is there already one? Palpatine84 (talk) 20:13, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, Palpatine84, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is actually already one you can deploy. See {{In use}}, which allows you to add parameters for how long you hope to be working on the article and for what reason. This should only be for a period of less than an hour in the hope of avoid edit conflicts - not for prolonged periods of time. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I would say the {{in use}} tag can be used for a few hours (it depends on whether there are other editors who also want to edit the article that same hour). I have successfully deployed that tag on an article that was being heavily edited, to mark my own section to contribute to (not the whole article). Note also that other editors are not obligated to respect the tag, though most editors do, as long as it is reasonable. There is {{under construction}} which can be used for longer periods of time (days); it's not used to mark the article for your own editing session though, rather it is a warning to readers that the article may not make sense while being built and an invitation to others to lend a hand. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:16, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

General Question

Can I create a page for a School or Academy (About age, founder, presence etc etc) Sophia James Hurara (talk) 05:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sophia James Hurara, welcome! You can create an article for a school (or any other subject) that meets the general notability guidelines. Please see WP:YFA. Do note also, that an ARTICLE, which is what you can add to Wikipedia if the institution meets the aforementioned notability criterion, has specific scope, structure and style, which may not be the same as what you have in mind. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Audio and Video

Can users add pieces of audio and video to articles? Palpatine84 (talk) 15:36, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Palpatine84: Generally yes, howewer, they still need to comply with essentially the same policies as images, with one exception: IMO no fair use is possible. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Multiple 'Sentences' can use the Same Source; How do I cite that?

So a little while ago, I wrote a paragraph (still the only paragraph I've written on an article). I don't know if I should even cite it though as I did not use any external sources while writing it (besides watching the actual sporting event obviously)? Anyways, if I should cite it, I found a source. The thing is, many of the sentences I wrote, could also be cited to that source I found. So, how would I cite that? Do I just put the citation at the end of the paragraph? I don't know how else I would do it? I'm sorry if this was difficult to read/understand I had a hard time trying to explain this. FORMULA1FAN71 (talk) 15:02, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@FORMULA1FAN71: I assume you want to use a named reference. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Yes, I think that is it. Thanks! FORMULA1FAN71 (talk) 15:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Clarification on a BLP article

Can I have some input with Draft:Malinda_Kathleen_Reese please. I’ve made a few articles now, but this is my first BLP. I’m happy to do what is needed to get it up to shape.

It was bounced back with this message on my talk page doesn’t have enough reliable sources. Currently, the article as it stands has 34 different citations, including from newspaper articles and reliable websites.

Amongst other things, the subject is a YouTube personality, so some of the information is only on YouTube- such as when I referenced the first Translation video. Most of the personal life section is also referenced from things she has talked about in her videos, again not cited anywhere else- ideally, all the information would come from reliable sources, If I take all this information out, the article will be much slimmer and less informative, and won’t take in all the information out there on her, it won’t be as good as it can be.

Any guidance here would be much appreciated. Many thanks, Mojo0306 (talk) 12:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Mojo0306, yes, the draft has 34 citations. But I've checked the first six, and none of them help to establish that the subject is notable. If there are references among those 34 which do establish that she's notable, you could make them easier for a reviewer to find by removing most or all of the others. Maproom (talk) 12:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Maproom I think I shall do that then. The Washington Post/Guardian/Time Magazine ones should help with establishing notability, and I can de-clutter the rest. Mojo0306 (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Mojo0306 I'm afraid very few proposed articles on "YouTube personalities" succeed in establishing their notability. I suggest you read WP:NYOUTUBE for guidance.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Shantavira Thank you- I shall have a read from there. Mojo0306 (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Edited articles

Is there an available list of notable articles that need to be edited? Palpatine84 (talk) 15:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Palpatine84, Wikipedia:Community portal has something like that. You can also check pages like Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:44, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Palpatine84, I've occasionally used WP:TASKS for this. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Publish Draft Article

How to publish a draft article? BrianOkara (talk) 17:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@BrianOkara: welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, Draft:Ahsan Mughal could not be a Wikipedia article since the person the article is about is not notable, according to Wikipedia's definition of notability. In addition, most of the draft is a copyright violation, and it is also written like an advert, so it has been tagged for deletion. There is some more information on your user talk page. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 18:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Sandbox Help

Hi. I don't have a "more" dropdown on my sandbox page so I can publish my article to wikipedia. Can you help? Roper19 (talk) 19:13, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

(This was also asked at the help desk. I responded there) Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:33, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Felix Vogel advertizing Wikipedia services & incomplete article

A Felix Vogel has written to me saying "I see that you want your Wikipedia page to be edited and updated. Our team provides these services and I can guarantee you quick and effective results." This sounds to me like an offer of a paid service. His email includes 'wiki specialist'. As far as I know 'paid editing' is not allowed...so presume his email is a wind-up. I'd like to bring him to your attention.

In the meantime can you put a banner up on the article page about my work which reads "Work in progress", or "half-finished", "incomplete", "less than 50% done"? Or "this page will never be correct due to Wikipedia's rules".EddieLeVisco (talk) 16:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up – this is not the best place to report such matters, though. There is information about how to report that kind of scam, here. --bonadea contributions talk 17:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

No article is ever finished, Wikipedia is constantly a work in progress, your own website is the place for a complete page about you. Theroadislong (talk) 17:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Articles are never finished but sometimes they are finished off and preserved. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Unable to push article

Hi

I'm trying to publish an article that I've created but it's flagged up for deletion. I would be grateful if someone could please clarify as to what I'm doing wrong here.

The title of the article is: Karwan Jamal Tahir (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Karwan_Jamal_Tahir) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karwan Tahir (talk • contribs) 17:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Regards, Lea Karwan Tahir (talk) 17:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

We are not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 17:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

For those watching this thread but not the editor's talk page: I have asked the editor to consider changing his name OR verifying his identity. Unless an administrator temporarily blocks him, this is just a request, not a requirement. I have also put a customized conflict of interest notice on his talk page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Question

Hello whoever is reading this, my question goes as follows: Are there any staff at Wikipedia or is it all volunteers ? 95.145.56.201 (talk) 17:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

There are staff, but outside of specific circumstances they do not make content decisions in their capacity as staff. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 17:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

The staffed Wikimedia Foundation does office, financial, development, research and outreach work; which supports Wikipedia and other volunteer projects within their organizational umbrella. Zindor (talk) 17:36, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

If you are asking if we are paid or not, I get paid twice as much as the 2nd-highest-paid volunteer.  *gets out calculator, 2 X 0 carry the 0...* davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Simple answer is that every single one of our 6,000,000+ Wikipedia articles, our noticeboards, our help fora are all created and run by unpaid volunteers. The Wikipedia Foundation owns the servers, pays for the 5GWh of energy they consume each year, pays developers to update the mediawiki software that the numerous language versions of Wikipedia use, and employs some 300 staff around the world to promote and encourage Wikipedia use, administer grant-giving, develop new tools, and oversee our Terms of S. In  2012 one WMF employee was paid to establish the Teahouse, though now it, too, is totally volunteer run. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:56, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

External links on user page

How to add a link on my pageLil Keba (talk) 14:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC) Lil Keba (talk) 14:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Lil Keba. It looks like you may be trying to use Wikipedia as social media or as a means of promoting your career as a rapper. Please see WP:NOPROMO for Wikipedia's policy on promotional activities on the platform.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Brian Eyrl Bevan

Re: Brian Eyrl Bevan, the rugby league player. Three times now I have corrected his date of birth from 24 January 1924 to 24 June 1924 with impeccable sources. Three times it has been changed back to the wrong date. Can anybody out there help correct this? Garyslater61 (talk) 23:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

@Garyslater61: The source cited in the article says he was born in January. If you have a different source with a different date, start a discussion on the article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 00:03, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

help

I've tried over the years to change/improve/correct entries here on wikipedia and they always (usually instantly) get deleted or reverted, etc. I'm so frustrated that this is so difficult. How could it be THAT difficult? I can't afford to hire someone who is capable of this labrinthian task. I've been trying over the years to do a couple of things.

I worked at an advertising agency for 20 years, and at one point it was absorbed by another agency, and a complicated evolution of name changes and eventual dissolution unfolded. But there is a fact that I can't seem to turn into an encyclopedic entry. The original agency had a name, it was created and existed until the acquisition and name change. It is simply a fact, not a promotion or 'blatant advertising" or something... There was a group of people, we did a certain body of work, there were notable achievements and then at one point... the company name changed to another one. Then there can be a link to that new company. Currently, I have been unable to create a page for the "original" company because the new company had placed a redirect on the page.

I would be satisfied to simply have a page that stated the original company name, logo and some basic encyclopedic info, and just see if it can stick.... for a few years :)... that would be nice, just that.

Can anyone help me with this? would anyone be willing to do a zoom call with me and walk me through the process??

Thank you in advance. Cccommander (talk) 19:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Nobody is going to contact you via off-wiki means, especially if it's a cold call. And the new company did not place the redirect - odds are the article was at one point at the old title, and then moved to the new one, leaving a redirect behind. If a company was completely bought out/merged and wasn't in and of itself notable, odds are the likelihood of proving notability post-purchase/merger is going to be virtually nil. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 19:18, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Cccommander. If you are talking about Publicis New York, the lede of that article mentions to former name. And the redirect from the old name takes you directly to that statement. That is how Wikipedia handles such a situation. —teb728 t c 22:22, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

The article has a History section. A modest amount of information can be added about the pre-merger "The Kaplan Thaler Group" as long as references from reliable sources are included. David notMD (talk) 00:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Help me improve my article

Following the guidelines that an experienced user left on my to-be-reviewed article, I made some edits that I felt were necessary. I request the Teahouse editors to give me their comments on it. Assassin7177 (talk) 13:46, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

You asked for advice on Draft:Karikku nine hours ago. Continue to work on improving the draft. In time (days to as long as months, sadly) a reviewer will reply. David notMD (talk) 14:10, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

You asked the same question a few hours earlier at #Help me improve my article. Like all editors, Wikipedia Teahouse hosts are WP:VOLUNTEERs and it sometimes takes a bit of time for one of them to answer a question. You need to be a little more patient and not basically recreate multiple threads about the same thing if your question isn't answered as quickly as you like. Doing such a thing is not going speed things up and make someone want to answer your question, but it may have the opposite effect.

Regarding the draft itself, you're going to have to show that subject is Wikipedia notable to warrant a stand-alone article written about it. Articles about YouTubers might be hard to assess sometimes because it's always not clear whether its about the YouTuber or the YouTube channel. In many cases, the article might be about a combination of both. Maybe you should try asking for feedback at some WikiProjects like Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube, Wikipedia:WikiProject Internet culture or Wikipedia:WikiProject India since the members of those WikiProjects might be able to help determine whether the subject of the draft has received the WP:SIGCOV needed to establish Wikipedia notability. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:38, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Userpage

Can anybody edit your userpage other than you? Palpatine84 (talk) 15:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Unless it's protected, yes. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 16:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Generally they shouldn't, though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Palpatine84. See WP:UP#OWN for more details. Most experienced editors will leave another editor's user page alone, unless there's a clear policy or guideline violation that needs adresssing, a clear format or syntax error that needs fixing, or they're asked by the user whose page it is to edit the page for some reason. As long as a userpage meets WP:UPYES, it should be OK; user pages are generally only edited by others when it moves into WP:UPNO territory. Regarding your user page, there is a minor formatting error that's causing the page to be displayed as it is. Try removing the space/indentation before the word "Hi" and the page should display properly. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:48, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Create Page For My Brand/Company

Hello! Can I create a page for my brand or business? Alanamieditors (talk) 10:08, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Alanamieditors Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not a place for businesses to tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia does not have mere "pages", it has articles about subjects like businesses. Those articles should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a business, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. Wikipedia is not interested in what a business wants to say about itself, only in what others completely unconnected with the business say about it. You would have a conflict of interest in editing about your business, and should not directly do so. 331dot (talk) 10:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Why do I have a feeling 331dot copy and pasted this like a template? Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 20:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Le Panini I did not use a template, although I'm sure it's similar to other messages I have written. 331dot (talk) 21:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Similar questions to this are frequently asked at the Teahouse which means the answers given are most likely also going to be similar. Even if a template was used, there wouldn't be a problem as long as the answer properly addresses the question being asked. Although the OP's question was fairly straighforward, they did not specifically state which company or which brand; so, the replies the question receives are likely going to be just as general. If the OP provides more specifics and wants further clarification, then someone will try and help them out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah, just a joke. Questions like these have very similar responses. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 02:13, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Tony Bobulinski Article?

If there is a Tony Bobulinski article being written at this time, where do I find the draft? Charles Juvon (talk) 00:28, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

That would be Draft:Tony Bobulinski, which I have just created. Feel free to expand and submit for AfC review. Cheer! BD2412 T 00:58, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

By the time the debate is over, everyone will have forgotten who Tony Bobulinski is. David notMD (talk) 02:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

If something is forgotten, its still history. Happy Wars is an example of this. We're not gonna go and delete the Charles Lee article because nobody is interested anymore Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 02:24, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I may AFD all Charles Lee articles out of spite because I don't know which one you mean. :D //joke// Koncorde (talk) 02:27, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I rest my case, given that the one reference in that draft has this as a title: "TRUMP’S PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE SURPRISE: INVITING A HUNTER BIDEN ASSOCIATE NO ONE’S EVER HEARD OF OR CARES ABOUT" David notMD (talk) 03:06, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

He's a footnote. WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E agrees. Koncorde (talk) 03:12, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Copyright Issue

I'd like to report a copyright breach here. I don't know how to deal with it, but it has been blatantly copied from a website (just Google Search the first edit) Hockeycatcat (talk) 05:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing it out. I've already reverted the edit. But another time, you can do this yourself. Please see Wikipedia:Text Copyright Violations 101. -- Hoary (talk) 06:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

WP article less than half complete - either delete it or make it correct!

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

Wikipedia is not a "job". All editors are volunteers. Instead of insulting them, you might find them more willing to help you figure things out by being more civil. You've received advice before both on your user talk page and in responses to your previous Teahouse questions explaining that you can discuss your concerns about the article on its associated talk page; so, I suggest that's what you continue to do. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:45, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Firstly - who is this Felix Vogel offering their services to edit Wikipedia articles: (Redacted)

Secondly, my page does not properly represent my work or what I have done in my life. Pernickety, pompous, patronizing and persecuting WP editors are not helping at all. After 3 years my page is still less than 50% complete and DOES NOT SERVE ME OR ANYBODY ELSE if it is not representative. After 3 years of the article stating, for example "Gold freelances for organizations such as the BBC, with which he frequently works on photography projects." Only now someone has applied this at the end of it [third-party source needed] when clearly the BBC has used my work 16 times on their international news website. Why is a third party source needed?

I have made screen grabs of how my article was looking at its best and will paste this to my website with an explanation that it's not possible for Wikipedia to provide a truthful article as you are all way too anally-retentive to do anything correctly. If you can't pull your fingers out and provide an honest article then delete it, because frankly, I have worked far too hard and achieved too much to have my work look like a joke online. And that's what you editors are. A joke. So delete the bloody article will you, if you can't be bothered to do your jobs properly. This is too much work and I'd rather not have an article at all, Wikipedia is completely counter-productive and too much bullshit. Idiots!EddieLeVisco (talk) 07:11, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

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

Legitimate Sources?

Are the following sources legitimate to be in references?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ Amazon openthenews https://newsaffinity.com https://monacolife.net Crunchbase wealthmonaco.com IMDB LaraPitts (talk) 22:38, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Amazon is not to be linked, let alone cited. IMDb is a wiki and thus not a reliable source. Yahoo tends towards payola and advertorials. Crunchbase is not a reliable source. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 23:06, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

I think IMDb can be used for development history if used sparingly and effectively. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 02:21, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@LaraPitts: check out the reliable sources noticeboard. Thanks. Opalzukor (talk) 08:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Changing the title of an article

My first article Draft(Karikku) is created. I am really thankful to the Teahouse editors for all your help. I know that I am being a little restless, but I hope the senior editors understand as it is my first article. I found another form named 'Karikku' was submitted last year and was rejected once. The Talk page of my article showed me that it was named a resubmission. So I humbly request the experts here to help me change the title from 'Karikku' to 'Karikku(web series)'. I am in no hurry as I have more than 2 months left before the review, so the editors have a lot of time to lend me a helping hand. Assassin7177 (talk) 05:10, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Assassin7177. You've created Draft:Karikku, but that's not an article yet. The title of a page is normally changed as explained in WP:MOVE, but I don't think you need to worry about that right now. If the draft is approved by an AfC reviewer, then that reviewer would most likely straighten out any issues with the title of the page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much sir. I am very much relieved after hearing that. Please continue to help me whenever you are free. This guidence is an unbelievable experience — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assassin7177 (talk • contribs) 05:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Assassin7177. Your draft will be evaluated on the content of the draft, rather than than the title of the draft. So, work to improve the content and do not worry now about the title.

On to your username. This is a collaborative project. How is it possible to collaborate with a username that indicates a desire to murder people for money or politics? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

It was a friend who created this and I disagree already. I have requested for a change in Username. I have chosen Atlantis7177 as my new user name. How long does it take to change a user name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assassin7177 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't necessarily have the same concerns about your username as Cullen328 has, but a username change request shouldn't take too long as long as there are no problems with you the new name you chose. On the other hand, I'm a bit more concerned with the that you're trying to recreate an article that was previously discussed multiple times and something whose title was WP:SALTed by the last administrator to delete the article. Administrators only tend to SALT a title when a page has been repeatedly recreated in a manner deemed disruptive. I'm not an administrator so I can't see the other "Karikku" pages that were deleted, but any attempt to simply recreate a previously deleted article without addressing the reasons that led to its deletion are unlikely to be accepted by the community.

Finally, I'm not sure what you mean by It was a friend who created this, but you should be careful of WP:SHAREDACCOUNT and make sure you and only you are using this account to edit. You shouldn't let anyone else know your account password or log in and let them use your account to edit. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

This newest draft is much shorter than the previously deleted version, but it presents new sources that might work. I'd punt the recreation to WP:DRV though since I am not that familiar with Indian sources. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

idk

How do I know what to edit? Idontevenknowatall (talk) 17:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

@Idontevenknowatall: Here's a great place to start. Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:51, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Idontevenknowatall. And once you've collected all 15 badges from completing The Wikipedia Adventure, there are lots of ideas in the 'Help Out' section at Wikipedia:Community portal. The key thing to remember is never to add anything to a Wikipedia article just becaue you happen to know it "for a fact". Instead, find good quality, reliable references that allow anyone else to "verify that fact". A good motto is: "If in doubt, leave it out!" Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:09, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

You may find this helpful too if you're finding things to do. Yogibur (talk) 09:50, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Creating a new article: Should I do it on my Sandbox, or in a Draft space?

Hi there: I'm making a new wp:blp article draft for Dorie Clark. I've been doing it here, in my Sandbox.

1. Is that the best place to do it?
2. Am I doing it right?
3. If I should be doing it in a draft of the article in that article space instead, how do I move it and also move my edit history? Or should I just make a draft and paste everything in that I already have?

Thanks in advance for the awesome resource that the Teahouse is, and to the volunteers who make this place amazing!! Nickgray (talk) 11:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Nickgray: generally, you can start a new article in userspace or in draftspace (Please dont do both - its a waste of everyone's time). Userspace drafts are commonly more "private". Drafts in userspace will not be edited by anyone except you, a reviewer and perhaps some of the folks here at the teahouse. Draftspace drafts are commonly more open and tend to be sometimes edited by multiple people. from a first view, it looks good. I have only one thing: The toplevel heading level for articles is the same as used here for this question, surrounded by two equal signs. As for moving pages (including drafts), see Help:MOVE. Howwer, I strongely recommed that you use the submit for review button for the first few drafts. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Insertion of an advert into an article?

Recently the article Harris Lebus has been edited to include what seems to be an advert for a book. The book may be a useful source. Could it be referred to in a different and less 'blatant' way eg as an External link not mentioned in the text and wth no image (which gives the life story of the author,as well, as the price, on the cover of the book)? BFP1 (talk) 08:50, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Harris Lebus

Another editor has now removed the advertisement. Maproom (talk) 10:53, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Theroadislong: and @Maproom:BFP1 (talk) 12:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Is this article NPOV?

I'm relatively new to debates on NPOV, so I just wanted to clarify before editing the article. The article I'm talking about is Lekki massacre, and, as I've detailed on the article's talk page, I think it does not adhere to NPOV. Can someone please clarify if it does? Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI ^{converse | fings wot i hav dun} 12:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello William. Welcome to the Teahouse. Determining if an article has a neutral point of view (NPOV) is not a simple process of just looking at the article and assessing it against a checklist or something. NPOV means that an article represents the major views on a subject as reported in reliable sources. You need to look at the preponderance of reliable sources, see how they represent the information on that subject, and decide if the Wikipedia article in question accurately represents the same viewpoint. If there are multiple perspectives, Wikipedia should give each perspective due representation persuant to its representation in reliable sources. That may include no representation of such a viewpoint if no reliable sources give it credence. I can't answer any specific questions on the article you've referenced here because I am unfamiliar with the subject, but if you believe the article to be non-neutral, what you need to do is, on the talk page, cite reliable sources that show differences to the article so that it shows the article does not represent those sources well. I hope that helps! --Jayron32 14:45, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit conflict

Hi Someone has edited my page by adding remarks within the page itself. Now when I correct the remarks its leading to an edit conflict. Can you please help me resolve this issue Draft:Ram Setu Controversy Bhumi2tandon (talk) 14:08, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Bhumi2tandon Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. An edit conflict occurs when someone else saves an edit to the same page you are attempting to edit before you save your edit. You may just re-edit the page to add your comment. Unless I am misunderstanding you, in which case it will help to know the exact message you get when you attempt to edit. 331dot (talk) 14:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bhumi2tandon. it is worth mentioning that you shouldn't refer to this, or any other article, as "my page". You may have created the first draft but once it is visible to the community here, anyone else can edit it. That's how articles get improved. Looking a the edit history of the draft article, there have been a couple of other people adding to it. Edit conflicts just happen when two people try to save new material at the same time and are nothing to worry about. Just copy the part you wanted to add out of the edit window, then close that window and re-open it. That'll allow you to continue placing your new material within the growing article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Saving without publishing

This may be a stupid question, but... is there any way to save changes without publishing? I can't work out if previewing will automatically do this. I want to do this because I'm writing a new page which is taking a long time, and because I don't want to loose things (e.g. because my internet goes down) I keep 'publishing' in my sandbox, but it means the page history is getting very long. Ruthhenrietta (talk) 08:56, 20 October 2020 (UTC) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 08:56, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I create new pages using Geany and save the result to my hard drive, now and again viewing what I've got in a Wikipedia "page" (?) that I give some silly throwaway name like "Alrgjsdjgsrgstjri", but am careful never to "publish" (save). (Indeed, there's one draft I've been tinkering with in this way since July or thereabouts.) When I'm happy with what I've got, and not before, I'll "publish" it with an appropriate title. -- Hoary (talk) 09:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary:, are you saying that Geany supports the Wiki markup language, in the same way that it supports other languages such as C++ and HTML (with syntax highlighting, code completion, etc.)? If it does, that would be fantastically useful. If it doesn't, I wonder if any other text editor has that feature. Mike Marchmont (talk) 13:03, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Mike Marchmont, no, it certainly doesn't recognize it when it sees it, and there's no mention of Mediawiki in this splendid list. Perhaps it could be done (see this). I also make a lot of use of Geany for XHTML; and yes, it would be pleasant if Geany similarly closed Mediawiki's REF tags and so forth. Often I make a number of markup mistakes while using Geany, but it's easy to fix these within Wikipedia. My purpose here isn't to promote Geany in preference to other text editors (Notepad aside); it's just that Geany is one that does what it should, costs nothing, and runs on any major OS. -- Hoary (talk) 13:34, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, @Hoary:. I didn't really expect Geany to support the Mediawiki language, but I thought it was worth asking. That said, I have now discovered the syntax highlighting feature in the native Wiki source editor. This makes it very much easier to read and review the text in the editor. I wish I had discovered it earlier.

Mike Marchmont (talk) 08:22, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Mike Marchmont, where does one enable this feature? (I don't see it in Preferences|Editing.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Hoary, on the main toolbar in the Source Editor (that's the toolbar that has the Bold and Italic buttons) it's the eighth button from the left. It has a picture of a pencil on it. Syntax highlighting is toggled as soon as you click on it, and the setting is retained for subsequent edit sessions. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Mike Marchmont! I'd never paid any attention to those icons; I'd hardly realized that they were there. I'm disturbingly unobservant. -- Hoary (talk) 13:27, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

You live and learn! (And by "you" I mean "you and I".) That's a very nifty feature – thanks, Mike Marchmont! --bonadea contributions talk 13:46, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hoary and bonadea: I've been lurking in the Teahouse for several months, and have occasionally asked for help here. I can't tell you how happy I am to be able to make a contribution at last. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:17, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ruthhenrietta: It really isn't that big of a deal if the page history is long. If you're concerned that you can't find a specific edit, use good edit summaries to help you find it. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:31, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, previewing does not save. It merely shows you what your changes look like. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks User:Hoary (I'll stick with Word!) & User:Ganbaruby (I won't worry) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 11:59, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Another tip. I edit articles in my Sandbox and preview them frequently. However, I virtually never save them there. Instead, I copy the (draft) text from the edit window into a text editor on my PC (I find MS Wordpad much better than MS Word, for example, because the latter will do stuff like turning two apostrophes — i.e. where italics are to be used — into " ). Later, when I return to continue building the article, I copy/paste the text from Wordpad back in to the edit box. Note that you need to check in your preferences for editing that the option "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary)" is checked. This makes it physically impossible for you to publish a part-edit, since you will leave the edit summary blank, on purpose, while building drafts. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Ruthhenrietta, Michael D. Turnbull's method and mine are very similar to each other. If you must use MS Word, then configure it so that it behaves like a text editor. But if you're going to do that, you might as well just use a text editor: excellent examples are (legally) free of charge. Simply, anything shown in Comparison of text editors as running on your OS (Windows, MacOS, Linux, whatever), open source, recently upgraded and free of charge should do the job. -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

What to disambiguate

Many articles define three letter acronyms. In some cases, I have added the acronym to a disambiguation page to help other readers find the article or section of the article. My question is, which acronyms qualify for disambiguation? How can I help readers finding things, without clogging disambiguation pages? I have read MOS:DAB, but it does not help much. Is there an objective way to decide what to disambiguate. Comfr (talk) 15:57, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Generally, when a link takes a user to a disambiguation page, you have to be more specific. Lets use door, for example. Door leads to a disambiguation page, so to be more specific, add parenthesis after it, like "Door (Every Little Thing album)". You can also link this by adding a | sign in a wikilink, like this:

Door, leads to a disambiguation.

Door (Every Little Thing album), leads to the album.

By typing this:

[[Door (Every Little Thing album)|Door]], the link will just show Door.

Hope this helps! If it doesn't, just leave a message. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:21, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Publishing page on my company

What are best practices, or things to keep in mind when publishing a page on my company? I do not want to promote or sound biased. Jayives33 (talk) 16:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jayives33, and thank you for asking your question. The best practices for publishing a page on your company are simple: don't. I do not mean to sound dismissive but Wikipedia is not for promoting your business nor is it a directory of businesses. We have established criteria for the inclusion of businesses and if yours meets these then please let some-one else volunteer to add your company. If you want to make a request for this, then you can use the Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies page. I know that's not the answer you were looking for but I hope it helps explain things. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:51, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view is an article about writing in a neutral point of view, and WP:PROMOTION is an article about avoiding means of self promotion. However, writing articles about yourself or something you created is greatly discouraged. User:331dot answered a question similar to this, and this is what he had to say:

Wikipedia is not a place for businesses to tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia does not have mere "pages", it has articles about subjects like businesses. Those articles should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a business, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. Wikipedia is not interested in what a business wants to say about itself, only in what others completely unconnected with the business say about it. You would have a conflict of interest in editing about your business, and should not directly do so. 331dot (talk) 10:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

I hope my answer and his past answer answer your question. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Reversal of edits

My students and I are relatively new to editing. Recently we have been working on the medical topic Uterine atony and making scholarly improvements. Twice in two days, edits have been reverted. Once by User:Firestar464 and previously by User:Materialscientist. It is not clear why the improvements were reversed. I assume they thought the page was being vandalized. What is the best way to contact these people to ask what's going on? Are there any guesses why the edits were reversed? Ewingdo (talk) 04:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

The best way is to repeat the question you ask Firestar464 and Materialscientist, and the best place to do this is Talk:Uterine atony. -- Hoary (talk) 04:39, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ewingdo: As for the first edit, they removed an infobox, which was considered blanking. Firestar464 (talk) 04:40, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Firestar464: Please forgive my ignorance but it seems that putting the infobox back would have been a better solution than reverting the entire edit. Also, the edit summary gave no reason as to why the change was made. Certainly, we need to learn about blanking. Thanks! Ewingdo (talk) 04:51, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ewingdo: when someone makes an edit which is partly constructive and partly destructive (as can happen with any of us), it is not someone else's job to unpick the mess. It's better just to revert it, and let the original editor have another shot at doing what they intended. The content they typed in will still be there in the edit history. Maproom (talk) 06:48, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

​I actually think the infobox being used in that article is more of a WP:DISINFOBOX than not; so, I've WP:HIDDEN it for now. If someone familiar with the subject matter can fill in more of the parameters, then it perhaps can be unhidden. Now for some other stuff. You posted My students and I are relatively new to editing. Does that mean you're participating in a m:Wiki Education Foundation run project? If that's the case, your class should've been assigned one or more WikiEd advisors who are good people to ask about things Wikipedia. If you're not participating in any such project, then maybe you should consider signing up for one because it can make it easier for teachers and their student to learn about Wikipedia and avoid problems when they edit. You also mentioned making scholarly improvements above, which may indicate that you might be misunderstanding something about Wikipedia. So, it might a good idea for you and your students to take a look at Wikipedia:Expert editors, Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Scholarship and particularly Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) for reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:11, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly:Thank you for your kind words. Yes, I have set up a Wiki Education Foundation run project and we will be starting next week. Only a few students since it is our first course. We will be working with our library folks to educate the students on reliable sources. Our library folk also have Wikipedia experience. As for the term scholarly input, I made up the term as an indication that the students will be asked to make an appropriate and significant input to a Wikipedia medicine topic, beyond simply correcting grammar or updating references. As the teacher, I feel that I clearly understand the Wikipedia concept (for example, no original research) and I'm now working on gaining more experience. Examples of recent contributions by my students include Familial hypertriglyceridemia and Postoperative residual curarization and Potassium-sparing diuretic. Maybe obscure topics in the grand scheme of things, but the students still did good work. Ewingdo (talk) 07:30, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ewingdo: Regarding medical articles, the community consensus is somewhat more restrictive than the general WP:RS guidelines – see WP:MEDRS for some specific guidance. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:42, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia page pasted to my website so WP article can now be deleted.

I have now pasted a previous version of the Wikipedia article about my work to my personal website with an explanation of why it cannot be properly edited.

I have written: "In 2017 a marketing company employed by a gallery, I made a high profile exhibition at, reviewed my career and said they thought I deserved a Wikipedia article page. One was made, below, but after 3 years, it remains incomplete. It is not possible for the subject of the article to edit it themselves and Wikipedia's volunteer editors have to be cajoled into editing the page for you. The editing process, however, proves to be impossible because of the editor's pernicious attitude, thus my article does not serve me or anyone looking at it, properly. Therefore I have made screen grabs of the half-finished article and pasted it here on my website, as this is as good as it will ever get. I have asked Wikipedia editors to delete the page if they cannot be bothered to finish it. The editors are counterproductive to achieving anything positive and too awkward to deal with in a normal way."

I think this is a fair and truthful explanation and my website page is here (join up the gaps): https: // www. edgold. co. uk/ wikipedia

The ball, as it has always been, is in your court so either get the article properly finished or delete it.EddieLeVisco (talk) 08:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

The article will not be deleted just because you want it to be; if you want to argue that you do not meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable artist, that's a different matter. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I really don't know (and don't really care) what this is about, but ... oh, brother! The article about you is not "finished," you say. I would like to point out to you that it is not possible for you ever to see it "finished." There is no article about me at all here (and there's zero call for one), but if there were, I could never see it "finished," either. A Wikipedia article about me would not be "finished" until it gave the date and cause of my death. And I'll never see it do that. Uporządnicki (talk) 08:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

To 331dot's point, subjects of articles are not able to decide what does or does not belong in an article about them, and that includes not being able to delete it if not happy with it. David notMD (talk) 09:05, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello EddieLeVisco. I'm another of these awkward editors, and I sometimes create articles about photographers. These are of course created by different people and in different ways; but let me describe one example. I created, and subsequently tinkered with, the article John Harding (photographer). Here's how this transpired. I'd seen a couple of books by Harding (at a shop in Shinjuku), was impressed, and bought them. As I looked at them, I thought that it would be good if there were an article about him. I did a little googling and found that yes, there were some usable (reliable, independent, published) sources about him. Using these, I constructed an article on him. (I did this on my hard drive, as it happened.) When I thought it was ready, I copied it onto Wikipedia. Up to this point Harding had never heard of me. I then did two things: First, I emailed him (using the address I found on his website) alerting him to the article, saying that I couldn't add any inside info and therefore wouldn't be asking him any questions, but asking him to point out if I'd got anything wrong (whether by my own incompetence or by my careful use of a credible but mistaken source). He replied that nothing about it worried him. Secondly I entered my (?) little article in a quasi-contest named "Did you know...?" It succeeded, and thanks to this, for one day only this minor article was viewed by a few dozen people who'd never otherwise do so. I haven't had any further communication with Harding, though I've asked him to alert me if he spots any funny business in the article about him before I notice it. The article may or may not be a "positive" (if minor) achievement (I'm not the best judge of this), but I can assure you that no cajoling was involved. -- Hoary (talk) 09:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

We don't delete articles because people ask us to, see WP:OWN. And the multiple threads here is annoying, please stop. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

We do indeed delete articles, if there's a valid reason to do so. Here's how. First, we look in "Reasons for deletion" to check that yes, we do have a valid reason for deletion. And then we follow the recipe "'Articles for deletion' in 3 steps". You, EddieLeVisco, are as free to do this as anybody is. -- Hoary (talk) 09:59, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hoary We shouldn't be encouraging users to try and delete articles about themselves, as WP:COI says that you shouldn't edit articles on yourself. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:06, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Joseph2302, certainly we shouldn't encourage them to delete such articles themselves, but it seems to me acceptable for them to ask other editors to use the regular procedure to consider whether they should be deleted, or not. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.218.14.156 (talk) 12:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Joseph2302, I don't believe that I have encouraged anyone to attempt to delete any article. However, if you're saying that the biographee is not as free to nominate an article for deletion as you or I am, then this comes as a surprise to me. I'd thought that a valid argument for deletion was just that, regardless of who (aside from block-evaders and the topic-banned) it was that made it. -- Hoary (talk) 12:30, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Hoary is righter than they let on, on this matter. See WP:BLPKINDNESS and WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE/WP:BIODEL. Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

For the record, I, too, find this has crossed over from being a content dispute (the details of which don't seem to matter any more) to simple disruption, and would like it to stop, as it wastes the time and good will of too many unpaid, hard-working volunteers. Every time we get sucked into one of these, it chips away at the limited supply of enthusiasm for the project. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:01, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Celebrity Pages

Hi! And thanks for welcoming me here! I’ve noticed that on celebrity pages, there isn’t much consistency. One page in particular Amelia Presley that I’ve been following has been nominated for speedy deletion even though it appears to have been there for years, is up-to-date (as far as I can see), and has many reputable sources cited. The artist is clearly notable it seems. I had actually heard of her before, though I haven’t listened to much of her music aside from a song from years ago. My question is what makes this article qualify for deletion, because from what I see; all articles qualify to be deleted if this is the standard. Would love to see if I can help and learn through the process.

Also, I have a question about disambiguation articles. I’m not sure I completely understand what they are. I was going through the list of articles that need cleanup on Wikipedia and came across disambiguated articles and wasn’t quite sure how to help there.

Sorry for so many questions & any help is very appreciated!! Almaniacopedia (talk) 16:28, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Good questions. Articles being put up for deletion actually vary in the reason why. Articles can be deleted because they don't meet the notability policies, have copyright material, or is just plain nonsense. This article explains the reasons why an article may be deleted. According to the nominator who proposed deletion, the article fails to meet the criteria of WP:MUS, the criteria of a musician or ensemble that makes an article notable.

If you believe she is notable, you can state your opinion at the deletion discussion page where they are talking about it. When they come to a consensus, a decision will be made.

Now disambiguation articles. Lets say you look up Door. However, you don't want the article about the wood that opens and closes, you want the article about the Japanese album, called "Door". That's what a disambiguation page is for! With 6 million articles existing in the English Wikipedia, there are bound to be similar, or exact same article names. A disambiguation shows a list of all articles that have the keyword you searches up. Door (disambiguation) shows other articles that have door in it, if you intended to find something else with the same name. disambiguation = A list of articles with the same or similar name.

Hope these answers help! Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Le Panini Thank you so much for this info! I actually went back and added to a previous comment I made on the discussion page for Amelia Presley. I see that per the black and white verbiage on WP:MUS, the page qualifies to be kept due to #1 and #4 on that list. I see multiple actual news articles (online mostly) that are from reputable sources such as American Songwriter and others that looked like local news from places she played on a tour this year. So I added that in less words. I didn’t want to add too much because it seems people like to keep it brief. I actually feel sort of lucky? Haha. That may not be an appropriate term, but I feel lucky to be involved in this whole deletion scenario so early into my research on here. It’s really a great learning process.

And THANK YOU SO MUCH for explaining disambiguation! You put it in terms that I can understand and I appreciate you taking the time! Makes complete sense! Again, thank you so much for patiently answering my question.

almaniacopedia (Almaniacopedia) 13:44, 23 October 2020 (EST)

No problem! If you have any other questions about Wikipedia, let us know here, and me or some other regular would be glad to help. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 20:19, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Get feedback on a draft?

Hi everyone, I found an article that someone else wrote but was declined in AfC and decided I'd take a stab at doing a rewrite since it had a bunch of RS and the subject seemed pretty clear to pass GNG. Original decline was for writing quality and I've rewritten pretty extensively from the person who submitted originally. Anyway if you have a moment would love feedback on the draft talk or my own talk, especially if you know a bunch about skateboarding because I only know a little. Here's the draft. Or let me know where else I can go to get some feedback. Thanks! TheMusicExperimental (talk) 18:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

TheMusicExperimental, if you're asking about the article Cindy Whitehead, then one thing you could do is convert the capitalization of headings within it to "sentence style"; thus for example not "Skateboarding Career" but "Skateboarding career". This is a convention for en:Wikipedia articles. -- Hoary (talk) 01:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Hoary! It got published and cleared AfC in the meanwhile, I'll go make those changes and conform to that convention in the future. TheMusicExperimental (talk) 01:57, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Judylawson5 question

I logged on and made several minor changes to an existing article which seemed to be accepted and saved.

Then I used part of a sentence from the paragraph below, incorporated it into my new paragraph and added some statistical information. I then put this on a watch list instead of ticking minor change. Then all the changes were deleted.

My question is shoild I have just 1. deleted the original part sentence first then 2. clicked on minor change. There are no footnotes for the original sentence as it would mean more than 70 citations. Judylawson5 (talk) 02:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

(Added section title here at Teahouse, as there appears to be no connection between Gremista.32 and Judylawson5.) Courtesy: Clarke brothers. In answer to why reverted, content was added without references to support. David notMD (talk) 02:53, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

3RR

Would I be violating the 3 revert rule if I reverted this edit? I'm unsure if it would be considered obvious vandalism. Maka^(talk) 03:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Of course not! Please do so. He's actually the one vandalizing, don't worry. According to Wikipedia:3 revert rule, obvious vandalism is exempt from such rule.Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 04:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

The standard rules

I want to write an article on Wikipedia. what are the standard rules to folow Iterminator (talk) 04:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Please read WP:YFA, and what it links to. -- Hoary (talk) 05:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Publishing article

How can I know what improvement are to me made so my draft will get published SnehaMenon10 (talk) 06:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@SnehaMenon10: no sources? Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:39, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Iceberg Shortfilm. And for a short film released days ago, and no references, EXTREMELY unlikely this can meet Wikipedia's definition of notability regardless of any attempts at improvement. I expect it will either be Rejected or nominated for Speedy deletion. David notMD (talk) 08:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Misleadingly removing my addition without any explanation

I added content to article Vishal (actor) because it received good media coverage. After some days an user removed it by saying ' sri reddy claims removed' without giving any detailed explanation. He also removed the 'arrest' section for no reason in the same edit misleadingly. This is the edit - [6]. There is a lock in the page and i can't edit it what should i do? 2409:4072:6E15:759C:3775:F495:FB30:197A (talk) 06:43, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

You can ask Neutral Fan on his user talk page. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:37, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

The first paragraph you added appeared to cite no sources for the allegations, and five sources for the statement "Vishal responded by saying there are no evidences for her accusations." Things would be clearer if each citation came immediately after the statement that it's cited in support of. Maproom (talk) 11:46, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

How many people use Wikipedia?

Wikipedia seems to be known by everyone on the internet practically. How many people actually use it? Have you ever considered paying people to edit? I feel like there should be a Wikipedia for kids, or maybe just an online kid centered encyclopedia managed by or in part by Wikimedia Commons. Thanks for inviting me to the tea house! Lukeskrobot11 (talk) 21:39, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Lukeskrobot11: so just for english wikipedia, we've had about 130,000 people with accounts edit in the last month, plus lots of IP editors (hard to say how many unique individuals that represents). En-wiki had about 9.3bn page views in the last month from 840m unique devices. The Community has indicated it is very firmly against Wikimedia paying editors to edit. A Wikipedia for kids would require a lot of capacity to update, moderate and so-on - you'd need a way of convincing a large number of editors to be more interested in that as an approach. Commons manages our shared media library - is there a particular way you felt they'd be involved? And most importantly, welcome to both the Teahouse and the project. Let us know if you any question about editing :) Nosebagbear (talk) 01:27, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Lukeskrobot11: If you want to set up a Wikipedia for kids to learn to edit, the easiest and safest thing to do would probably be to create a fork of the then have some very strict management, such as creating a separate "private" version for a school and having the teachers manage account-creations. That way, kids could edit and make mistakes, but nobody outside their school would see them and at the end of the term, the changes would be erased.

Kids - and by kids I mean kids and teenagers whose editing patterns don't scream "I'm immature!" - are no doubt editing Wikipedia productively and have been since the early days.

By the way, if you are asking because you are a teacher or parent or you know kids who want to edit, read Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors and Wikipedia:Advice for parents. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Lukeskrobot11: see also https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Just as here, it's not a test site for playing on, but it might interest you. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:52, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Non-academic Egyptology

A few decades ago, all the ancient Egyptian texts and all the relevant information could only be found inside the academic institutions. Today, all the information is available to the public so that non-academics can also study the material available and assess the conclusions reached by the academics. Unfortunately, it appears that the Egyptologists still believe that they are the only ones dictating what the public should know about ancient Egypt and what not. For example, they keep rendering the Egyptian term bA, which came to mean “soul”, simply as ba without translating it, so that they will not have to reveal its history proving that the concept of the soul was the product of an accident and that no concept of the soul pertained prior to 2300 BCE, a period of time when the term bA was but the title of a high-standing official. As a result, when the word occurs with its primary meaning but is translated as “soul”, the text of the translation appears as if the author was composing some unintelligible magical incantation (that is exactly what academic translators call the Coffin Texts and The Book of the Dead). They also dare not admit the fact that the pharaonic kings were operating human breeding grounds where noble Egyptians (‘Bulls’) were inseminating foreign women (’Cows’), because those lowly foreign women were giving birth to gods, kings, men, and slaves. According to the texts, Ra, the god they present as the Sun-god, was born of a lowly ‘Cow’ girl!

Wikipedia editors keep erasing my edits (and lately my replies to their ‘talk’ pages) because they think that I have no right to say that I disagree with the academics as long as they disagree with me!!

Wikipedia readers do have a right to know how non-academics interpret the texts, as long as the translations are well documented. I suggest that permission be granted for the creation of an end section in articles relating to the Egyptian civilization to accommodate the point of view of the non-academics, informing readers accordingly.

In case this is not the right place for the above complaint, please advise accordingly. Thank you, Dimitrios Trimijopulos (talk) 18:47, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Dimitrios Trimijopulos, as Doug Weller just told you, "I can tell you with absolute assurance that your knowledge/experience cannot be used in Wikipedia. A. Parrot has referred you to one key policy, the other is WP:VERIFY. Finally, another policy, iWikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. Read that if the other two policies don't convince you." If you ask the same thing elsewhere (please don't), the answer will be the same. --Quisqualis (talk) 19:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Quisqualis You aspire that Wikipedia would “compile human knowledge”, but you cannot do that strictly following your key policies.

It takes a lot of study and a bit of courage!

Stay safe… among your policies.

Dimitrios Trimijopulos (talk) 21:06, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Dimitrios Trimijopulos: I can really appreciate your frustrattion. You are quite right: it takes years of study, and non academics do indeed have to power to shape accepted academic knowledge. I only have to look at the contribution that so-called 'amateurs' have made to the understanding of astronomy to appreciate that. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is simply a collation of previously published, reliable sources, and not a platform for original research or alternative ideas. Yes, once those alternative ideas have been taken notice of, then there would of course be a place for them here. We are not above including alternative interpretations here. But my impression is that you were hoping we could off you that platform to initialy promulgate those theories. Sadly, that is not within our brief, though there are many other alternatives available to you which might be better utilised for that purpose. Good luck with your studies. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I do see your point and I perfectly understand you as well as the other editors. Egyptology is a highly specialized principle, there is no doubt about that, yet some aspects of it are quite irrational and no special training is required for them to be noticed.

Suppose that you come across a three-word passage in the Pyramid Texts translated by five academic translators whose renderings are all meaningless and, moreover, you observe that three of the translators leave two of the three words without translation and instead they use a vocalization of the original Egyptian words. Then you look up the two words in Wikipedia and find out that they are key words occurring thousands of times in the texts. Your next move would be to search Wikipedia for an article that will provide some logical explanation for this illogical situation. THERE IS NO SUCH ARTICLE IN WIKIPEDIA! As you see, we are not dealing here with some original research or some alternative ideas. We are dealing with the oldest texts that humanity produced and academics have failed to translate. The three-word passage in question you can find following the link below.Dimitrios Trimijopulos (talk) 11:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC) https://www.facebook.com/Setbastet/posts/118401196219746

How does Wikipedia deal with territorial disputes on other languages native to the disputed country?

I have noticed that on the English Wiki, it simply mentions that the territory is disputed and the full extent of that countries claim (meaning how recognized the claim is.) However, for the disputes about Jammu and Kashmir and the Arunachal Pradesh in India, how would the Hindi, Marathi, Kashmiri, etc. languages handle this? There are over 600 million internet users in India, and who’s to say some of the other 3 billion internet users wouldn’t form their own opinion? , and this could make lots of loyal, very helpful English-speaking Indian Wikipedia users stop editing out of thinking that Wikipedia is biased against India. Lukeskrobot11 (talk) 13:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

That depends on the communities of the Hindi, Marathi, Kashmiri, etc. Wikipediae. You'd get a better answer asking them directly. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 13:58, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Lukeskrobot11. Non-English sources are acceptable on English Wikipedia; this allows minimization of bias towards English-language sources. That said however, there is often a preference for English-sources, because it's the primary language of most en-wiki editors, and India has an established English-language media. It is important we give the correct weight to information, so there is validity in your concerns. There is no bias against India, and in fact WikiProject India is one of the more active projects on this site. There's also other Wikipedias in languages such as Hindi. Zindor (talk) 14:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Why Birds have Nucleated RBC cells?

Why birds have nucleated RBC cells? /LR/ 43.241.67.135 (talk) 14:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia The Teahouse isn't the right place to ask this. Your local public library or university library may be able to help you. You might also try searching specialty databases and search engines like Google Scholar. If you are a member of a public library, your public library may have access to specialized databases that can help you research this. I for one have no idea what an RBC cell is or why it is nucleated. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC) Update I had forgotten about the Wikipedia Reference Desk. See Cordless Larry's comment right below this one. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:13, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, LR. The Teahouse is a place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. Questions such as yours here can be asked at the reference desk. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:11, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Goodness, IP editor. I found the answer in 30 seconds by asking the question on Google (other search engines exist). You should have the confidence to do your own research, rather than asking others. Surprisingly, our own Wikipedia page on Nucleated red blood cell is quite basic and doesn't actually talk about nucleation in various major phyla. Maybe someone will address that with support from some good sources. (I have now raised the matter on that article's talk page) Nick Moyes (talk) 15:18, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Volunteers who understand hindi language

Two days ago I participated in Talk:Udal of Mahoba and volunteers (teb728 and bonadea) ask me to provide a reliable source to make changes. According to me, the sources that I found most trustworthy books and the book called Alha khand (the book based on Alha and Udal ) but the book is in Hindi language so is it possible that my sources is checked by any administrator who understand hindi. Than it will become very easy. Sumit banaphar (talk) 07:57, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Sumit banaphar Welcome to the Teahouse. There is a useful page that puts users into a category for each language they claim (on their User Page) to understand. So "Category:User hi". lists all the known editors who have some level of competence with Hindi. You could take a look at a few of these editor's User Page and recent contributions and then seek them out via their Talk Page for assistance. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

How does Wikipedia treat cuss words?

Which words are censored and which words are not? Lukeskrobot11 (talk) 14:24, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTCENSORED. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:28, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

But also see the civility policy and the fourth pillar of Wikipedia. The habitual use of profanity is a form of incivility and is likely to result in warnings or even blocks. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:39, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, Lukeskrobot11 I loved seeing you ask a related question on your talk page, and now this one here. I can add no more than to say that when working on a collaborative project, we all need to get along nicely. Not everyone in life is, of course, but here we try to be fair but firm. We do not tolerate incivility (or stupidity, or harassment). So, instead, we steer new (or young) editors in the right direction by telling them if they've made unhelpful edits in the hope they will listen and do better next time. I would see no reason to use rudeness towards you or anyone else when I see and revert edits you've made like this one or this one. I would simply point out that you've been sadly mislead all your life if you seriously believed Berlin was the capital of France (ask ask you to steer clear of editing articles you know nothing about). I would also politely point out that adding commentary to an encyclopaedia article is not acceptable. I would ask you reasonably to take more care, and perhaps warn you that, if you did not, then you might get further advice or warnings from other editors. If I, or another administrator, then felt you fitted into the description of someone described in this essay, then I would block you permanently from editing. But that hasn't happened, and I'm sure you're here, wanting to contribute positively to this amazing free encyclopaedia. Along the way I would see absolutely no reason to cuss or swear at you, because we should all act like mature grown ups without the need to descend to insults. All I ask is that you take care with your future contributions, please. I have left a welcome message with some links you'd benefit from reading, and suggest you might have fund doing The Wikipedia Adventure. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:59, 24 October 2020 (UTC)  

plus and minus

What are these plus and minus number in red and green colours that keep appearing next to my contributions list Bhumi2tandon (talk) 13:58, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Number of bytes added/removed. There is an option in preferences to turn them off. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 13:59, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

If additional info was added, the byte count goes up, and down on the contrary. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Being uncontroversial

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

---

How do you avoid being uncontroversial on Wikipedia edits? Like for the articles on the Republican Party, Fox News. It seems like every single article has some person getting mad at something. Are there some topics that should not have Wikipedia articles or paragraphs on them, such as ones that are so controversial and has not even been verified by any sources? Or should we include every single conspiracy theory and include every source on them with an “encyclopedic tone.” It seems there are some things that are just so hard to believe and obviously untrue we shouldn’t even mention them in articles. Lukeskrobot11 (talk) 16:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Lukeskrobot11. A good question. The answer, as usual, is "it depends on the sources". If independent people have written about a conspiracy theory, a scam, or a hoax, then Wikipedia canhave an article about it, based on those sources. If the sources disagree, then the article should discuss all the views put forward in major sources. What we don't do is base articles on primary sources; so if there is plenty of material on the web about a fringe theory, but pretty well all the material is presenting and arguing the theory, and little secondary material discussing it, then it will not merit an article. You might also find FRINGE helpful. Controversy itself is not something we necessarily avoid: see BRD. --ColinFine (talk) 16:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

{edit conflict) Lukeskrobot11, we certainly lack nonpartisan people here, this platform seemed to be dominated by Democrats. Thus its no surprise to me that Republican articles are being contaminated by angry Dems. If you can tone the bias down, it'll be appreciated. If you need help to do so, perhaps refer to the article's talk page. If there's obvious hoax (I mean factual hoaxes, not ones blinded by your political stance), feel free to remove it or replace it with the facts. GeraldWL 16:31, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

For help on bias, read WP:NPOV and Wikipedia:Describing points of view for better understanding. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

User:Gerald Waldo Luis, Ill try to make edits that are not “blinded by my political stance.” Lol, something that is “overrun by democrats”, it sounds like that is definitely YOUR political stance that might be blinding you. I do believe some articles can’t be presented in a neutral tone. This is why I’ll try and make it as FACTUAL as possible, not as necessarily NEUTRAL as possible. Lukeskrobot11 (talk) 16:38, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Lukeskrobot11, I'm Indonesian not American, so I don't know any of your political bullshit and I have no American political stance. Plus I don't get it, if you wanna be factual you also gotta be neutral. It seemed like you're tryna pick a fight here. GeraldWL 17:03, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Okayyyy, lets archive this question. The second I saw a political question, I thought, "hey, we should probably keep this brief". Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 17:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

There's great irony in how this thread turned out. The OP simply provided a couple of examples of pages, and asked how to avoid controversy: they didn't offer a political opinion. We can probably keep this thread open, just as long as it's remembered this is a welcoming place for new editors. Zindor (talk) 17:13, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

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

Warn him

Now it's enough, just two days ago when I replied Satyitihas then a administrator remove my reply and saying not to make the Wikipedia a comment section or many things but when he is giving that stupid reasons in everybody's discussion section in talk pages of Alha,Udal of mahoba and Banaphar than why any administrator not doing anything? So kindly request please remove his reply and warn him not to make discussion section a chat section otherwise I have to reply him in a very proper way. Eroberar (talk) 08:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC) Eroberar (talk) 08:18, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Satyitihas has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of User:Ultimate survi. David notMD (talk) 08:33, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

As has the OP as well.... Joseph2302 (talk) 10:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, great conversation! A+. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 17:41, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Rao Sahib Title in British India

How do I add the name of a person who received the title of Rao Sahib from F.M. Wavell, Viceroy of India in 1946 Jazzy350 (talk) 03:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Add it to what? -- Hoary (talk) 05:52, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Rai Sahib has a list of some of the recipients of this title. Guidelines for people lists of this ilk are to include those who are already the subject of a Wikipedia article about them (hence names appear blue). Exceptions can be including people for whom a confirming reference exists. David notMD (talk) 09:28, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Jazzy350: Also asked and answered at WP:HD#Rao Sahib. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:46, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Help with sourcing biography and verifiable source

Hello, my question is about this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kusuma_Rajaiah

It was declined with a comment "Large part of this biography is unsourced. Please introduce references where the subject has been covered in-depth."

My questions are: 1. Is there a tool on Wikipedia that can me to know the quality of the citation? (for example, by providing a rank, similar to how Google ranks its sites?) 2. There are many articles on the subject and I cannot practically cite all of them here. How many citations are optimal / required? 3. Would it be ok to cite Youtube videos from the subject's own channel? In many cases, these videos were produced by various news outlets or other secondary organizations. 4. Regarding verifiable sources, would it be ok to cite primary school textbooks or government material, in a picture screenshot format, where the subject has been covered?

Moreover, since the subject is an inventor, most articles may discuss the subject's invention. How should one disambiguate that the article is about the subject and not about the invention? LifeZealZest (talk) 15:29, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@LifeZealZest::

1.: There is no automated tool, but there are frequently discussed sources. In general you can also ask here if a specific website document would be considered a good source. 2. In general, you need one good citation per fact asserted. One citation can be used for different facts, per WP:REFNAME. In general, WP:THREE is the absolute minimum, but you probbably need more. 3. No, unless is can be proven that 1) They are not falling under WP:SELFCITE, that is, they are independent of the subject (so no interviews/press releases) and 2) that the subject has sufficient permission to post them on their youtube channel (WP:COPYLINK). 4. Sources dont have to be online, though they need to be published. Printed books are perfectly acceptable. Note that IMO many articles from student books are actually originating from elsewhere. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:08, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

No picture screenshots of text books, as that is copyright protected content. Even for gov't publications, just reference. David notMD (talk) 18:49, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Protecting a bio

Hi how to protect a person Wikipedia bio ? 202.134.150.201 (talk) 17:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Please file a report at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

That is, if the article has been subject to a significant amount of you recent vandalism: editing intended to damage Wikipedia. If it is rather that people are changing the article to say something you don't think should be in the article, then the appropriate action then is to discuss the issue with other editors, and try to reach consensus: see BRD. --ColinFine (talk) 19:03, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Help with declined draft

Hi, I'm relatively new here, so any help will be much appreciated. I created the Wikipedia article about my brother, Eneko Knörr. It has been declined because "This submission appears to be taken from https://angelinvestorschool.com/speakers/eneko-knorr/". In fact, both texts (the one on that page and the Wikipedia article) are based on a text written by Eneko Knörr himself, who gave me permission to use it for his Wikipedia page. What should I do? Should I just rewrite the whole article, or is there anything else I could do? Thank you, Gari Garikoitz Knörr (talk) 18:41, 24 October 2020 (UTC) Garikoitz Knörr (talk) 18:41, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Garikoitz Knörr. The Angelinvestorschool website is copyrighted, so the text you used is also copyrighted, and therefore cannot be used on Wikipedia. You state that the content was written by your brother. Acceptable Wikipedia articles summarize what reliable independent sources say about a topic. In other words, Wikipedia has no interest in what your brother says about himself, but rather summarizes what publications with no connection have written about him. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:57, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Eneko Knörr, which has been nominated for speedy deletion as copyright violation. David notMD (talk) 18:59, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Cullen328. Yes, I understand. Well, that's why I added a number of references of independent publications. But I'll rewrite the whole article. Thank you and sorry for the inconvenience. Garikoitz Knörr (talk) 19:29, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Creating a Work Page

I am an Indian Actor and I was trying to create my work page. Ans it got deleted... Can you please guide me on it ? I want to create my page on Wikipedia having my work space and details in it. Vijayant Narayan (talk) 19:44, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Vijayant Narayan: like many people you have a misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, (roughly, that several people completely unconnected with you, and not prompted or given information by or on behalf of you, have chosen to write articles about you, and been published in reliable places) then Wikipedia can have an article about you. It will not belong to you, it should not be written by you, it will not necessarily contain what you want it to, and it should be almost entirely based on what those independent people have published. Please do not try to create an article about yourself. You might also find it valuable to read An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. --ColinFine (talk) 20:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Don't. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 20:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding photos to Wikipedia

How do I add pictures to an article? Canih28 (talk) 15:31, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Canih28. To help us answer your question, can you tell us (or link to) the image you'd like to add. You either need to already own the copyright as creator of that image, or you need to be confident it has already been released with a clear and appropriate Creative Commons licence. This allows it to be re-used for non-commercial and commercial purposes. If you've found the image on Wikimedia Commons, then that essential criterion has already been met, as only Creative Commons images are allowed there. Stuff you happen to find on the internet or on social media falls way outside what you are allowed to put on Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:38, 24 October 2020 (UTC).

Other pictures can be verifiedused in certain circumstances, such as promotional artwork or brand logos, but needs direct credit to the possible owner, distributor, and or publisher of said image. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Le Panini, but that is not quite correct. Non-free pictures can be used in certain circumstances, typically for cover art, posters, and logos; but I don't know what you mean by "verified". What is required is that the picture, and the way it is used in Wikipedia, meet all the terms in the non-free content criteria (which include identifying the source). --ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine:I was actually hesitant on answering this question, actually. Copyright can be confusing. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:27, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Canih28, see Help:Introduction to images with Wiki Markup/All or Help:Introduction to images with VisualEditor for more information. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Question...

Why is there a article on something as random as the JNR Class DD14 but not even a page on something as simple as a push-snowblower? I don't quite get it, but if i'm missing something I didn't see, then please inform me. I know there is a section on snow blowers in the article "Snow blower" however it talks more about commercial snow removal, (which has its own separate page). I looked in both categories Snow removal and Snowplows and didn't see anything. Please advise. Cheers! Shadowblade08 (talk) 18:27, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Note: Part of the message is missing, and is only viewable in the edit page. Please advise there as well. Thanks! Shadowblade08 (talk) 18:29, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Shadowblade08. The reason why some articles exist and others don't is that volunteers freely chose to write the articles that exist, and nobody has yet volunteered to write the non-existent articles. So, if you believe that Wikipedia needs an article on push-snowblowers, then I suggest that you pitch in and write it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

I fixed the category links in the post, it's fully readable now. As to your question, if you have sufficient reliable sources for the topic to be notable you are welcome to have a go at writing the article. See WP:YFA for further guidance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! I will Certainly think about it. Cheers! Shadowblade08 (talk) 22:01, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Question - is there a template that lists category contents?

Hi all, there is a template called "category tree" that lists subcategories, eg:

Is there a corresponding template that lists the articles within a category? Tom (LT) (talk) 22:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

 EricEdBV (talk) 00:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

See Template:Category tree all; for example, {{Template:Category tree all|Films about cats|mode=pages}} renders as:

--2606:A000:1126:28D:1DE6:D8D2:3598:9287 (talk) 03:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:31, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Cappuccino

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

---

What are ingredients for making cappuccino 😊😊 Ngutyana Sisipho (talk) 05:44, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

You're asking in the wrong place. This place is for asking about using Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 05:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

2 tablespoons of coffee, a pinch of salt, and fill the rest of the cup with birthday cake flavored coffee creamer. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:18, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Ask at the Coffeehouse. EEng 15:03, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Also, if the OP intends to use the preparation for stimulant purposes this could be interpreted as a request for medical advice. We better be careful. EEng 23:37, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, cappuccinos are a dangerous gateway drug. First it's all foam and cocoa powder, then someone introduces you to pumpkin spice and your life changes irreparably. Zindor (talk) 00:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Just to note, it's appreciated if you remain mature while at the tea-house. _Signed,Benjamin Borg ^(Talk) 17:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, my humour isn't everyone's cup of tea. Zindor (talk) 19:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm trying to decide whether he's serious. EEng 00:00, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I doubt it. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Benjamin Borg, were you serious? EEng 15:01, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Not sure, I just drank a few litres of capuccino _Signed,Benjamin Borg ^(Talk) 15:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Ngutyana Sisipho, the Teahouse hates coffee; we only offer tea. GeraldWL 10:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Ngutyana Sisipho, Filling the tea with birthday cake flavored coffee creamer is more or less appreciated as well. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 17:37, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

What Ngutyana Sisipho means is that not all of us love coffee, coffee is only disrespected at the teahouse page... However, a Cappuccino is not technically a coffee, right? or am I only thinking that a Cappuccino is different than a coffee... Maybe more addicting, but not as powerful??? (I'm probably making this up) Oh well, someday when the Teahouse turns into the Coffeehouse, people will like it more... However, I myself am a fan of milk, because you can dip cookies in it. Nah, forget it all and just call it the appetizer house. (though it doesn't have the same ring to it as the Teahouse:) ) Shadowblade08 (talk) 22:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

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

2 q

1. Is there a wikimedia public test wiki?
2. Is there a rule about children under 13 and are they allowed to edit? Because I saw an underaged user a gd fan (talk) 07:28, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@GeometryDashFan12::

1. There is not a single public test Wiki, but several. For example, this is the beta website for the english Wikipedia. Other URLs are similar.
2. AFAIK there is no rule against it. In theory, you could hit the save button from your first day on earth. Howewer, there may be per-country rules that limit the contributions of minors. I don't know if there are. See also Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, thanks, I'm under 13 --a gd fan (talk) 07:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

GeometryDashFan12 There are no age-based restrictions on contributing to Wikipedia by Wikipedia, but as noted your country may have such a restriction. It would be a good idea to check with your parent or guardian. However, since there are no age restrictions, we expect users to conduct themselves with the appropriate, mature attitude for a public forum. Many younger editors certainly do. You may wish to read this guidance for younger editors. 331dot (talk) 08:03, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I live in Texas, and I edit without any help from an adult or another person --a gd fan (talk) 08:08, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hard to believe that you are "under 13", as you have made >500 edits since registering in late September, that you have created local acounts in many languages other than English, and that your original User name was User:MirahezeGuy. David notMD (talk) 12:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, it does seem unbelievable, but I am under 13. (I'm turning 13 in a few months a gd fan (talk) 23:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Music

Tell Me More About Music Clizi (talk) 23:20, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Clizi: The Teahouse is for asking questions about using Wikipeida. Try Music, the links therein, and the references section there. RudolfRed (talk) 23:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Writing an article on a small area with limited citable resources

I compiled information from oral histories from a small parish in Ecuador where I was a Peace Corps volunteer. I do not believe there is any mention of the Parish, Ventura, on Wikipedia at all, even its containing Canton barely has anything. As far as I know my own written work is the only significant piece of research ever done on it, but I think its existance should be preserved on Wikipedia. The book is primarily in print form for myself, I don't really know how to upload it in a free and open manner. Given how I wrote it myself, it would sound a little silly to quote myself to write the article, but as said, the Parish otherwise has almost only oral histories, and my work is the only thing anyone has really written about it that I am aware of. What should I do? CalixtusMor (talk) 17:28, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

CalixtusMor, "preserve" sounds like "archiving." Wikipedia is not for that. As the tagline says, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a general reference work for notable topics. If your parish is notable enough, someone would probably make an article on it, but I'm afraid you'll have a conflict of interest with it since you're part of it. Would be happy to answer if you have any questions. GeraldWL 17:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

As I wrote it has nothing to do with anything I did, it is more the community itself, I did look on the Spanish Wikipedia and it is a dead link as a listing of parishes of Canar Canton, so there is something there that could be created. I see tons of articles about tiny places on Wikipedia, its a place with some history and relevance to the people who live there, and it needn't be anything terribly long anyway, just basic info on a place that still exists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CalixtusMor (talk • contribs) 17:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

CalixtusMor, we sure have articles on small communes and churches and stuff. But that doesn't mean all small communes and churches warrant an article. The priority in seeing on whether a topic warrants is article is, is it notable? See WP:GNG for this. The article would require coverage from reliable sources, think about The New York Times, Variety, etc-- most commonly newspaper and magazines are reliable, although various other media can also be RSes. Blogs, random tweets, and official websites cannot be sole sources. GeraldWL 17:53, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

If the parish is also considered a settlement, and a reliable source such as a government census record confirms it, then it would meet WP:GEOLAND; which is a rather low bar. Zindor (talk) 18:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

We might have an article on a small settlement, but it would not be a place for recording unpublished oral histories. —teb728 t c 02:05, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Reaching consensus on whether illicit trade and black market are distinct or duplicate topics

Hi, there is an ongoing discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Black_market on whether illicit trade and black market are duplicate or distinct topics. The discussion was started a few weeks ago after the article on illicit trade was replaced with a redirect to black market by another editor. The latest version of the illicit trade article before it was set to a redirect can be found at: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Illicit_trade&oldid=974366109. Only two editors provided their opinions so far and the discussion appears stalled (I left messages at two related Wikiprojects but did not manage to get other editors to join the discussion). Note that I did not contribute to the discussion so far as I am the initiator of the illicit trade article and have a close connexion with the topic.

Therefore other opinions would be welcome. But if no other editor provides his opinion, and/or a consensus is not reached, would the next step be to go to the Dispute resolution noticeboard? Thanks for your help. Factfox (talk) 15:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

• @Factfox: Since this is about a question with clearly-defined options (whether illicit trade should be redirected/merged to black market, or the other way around, or kept separate), I would say opening an WP:RFC is likely to work. I feel it requires a bit less bureaucracy than WP:DRN but that is viable too.

Yet another option is to request a merge. (I feel an RfC is better here because the boundaries between the topics are not clearly defined, but that is a fairly weak argument.) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:19, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks for your guidance @Tigraan:, I will look at opening a WP:RFC. Factfox (talk) 09:43, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Sessue Hayakawa

Came here from Imgur, someone had posted the biography of Hayakawa. I noticed there was no credit for "The Swiss Family Robinson" (1960) I seen that when it came out (I know, that makes me old) and I could have sworn he was in it. I looked it up on Wiki and sure enough his name was there. I am not familiar enough to edit, so I thought I'd bring that to somebody's attention. (Hopefully) TIA, Gerald

Sessue_Hayakawa

Swiss_Family_Robinson_(1960_film)

I hope that is correct about the references. I ain't got time to learn all this right now. PlaceboRock (talk) 09:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@PlaceboRock: Where did you propose having it added in the article? The film is listed in Sessue Hayakawa filmography. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 10:10, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@PlaceboRock: If you were asking about adding the film to a biography on Imgur, Wikipedia has nothing to do with that site. —teb728 t c 10:28, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

I started creating an article by mistake !!

My fellow editors and contributors, I was just editing my user page, and then, I linked something by mistake, thinking it was the Wikipedia Adventure that I linked it to.

But very much to my dismay, I discovered that it was linked to a fresh page for creating a new article which I have never tried before.

Please, help me by correcting the link to The Wikipedia Adventure and then, with the text as "ours", insert the link to"Help:New articles"

I will be so grateful for that. Prince (talk) 20:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

@Prince: I'm afraid I don't see any recent new page creations in your history, so you didn't actually save the page (whatever it was). I don't see any WP:REDLINKs on your user page, nor the word "ours". —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 15:48, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1, I put It on my watch list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikola Tesla edit (talk • contribs) 11:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Need help!

Hi, I just translated an article from Ukrainian Wikipedia, only now I noticed that as a result someone else's article was changed. I apologize for that. I ask the moderators to correct this error. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROSA Rosa Art (talk) 10:03, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Rosa Art: That's weird that it happened. I've copied the content of your article to Draft:Rosa (company) because in its current state it is not ready for the mainspace. Your draft currently has no references at all; be sure that the subject passes the notability guideline and has reliable sources to back the information up. You may want to refer to WP:YFA for more guidance on how to write a good article. In the meantime, your username currently implies a conflict of interest. Please read that page fully and make a paid-contribution disclosure if needed. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 10:21, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

I have added a note to Draft talk:Rosa (company) attributing the draft to the en-wiki and uk-wiki sources. —teb728 t c 11:20, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Existence in other language Wikipedias does not guarantee notability for English, as standards are not the same. David notMD (talk) 12:46, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Being Locked Down Due to Pandemic in my Town Barotac Nuevo, Iloilo, Philippines

 112.211.252.213 (talk) 12:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Is there a Wikipedia-related question? David notMD (talk) 12:47, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi

What is the teahouse? Icreatedthisusername (talk) 03:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Icreatedthisusername. The Teahouse is a place for less experienced editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and for more experienced editors to do their best to answer them. Do you have another question? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:05, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Cullen328, more or less. The Teahouse is a place for any editors to ask, and answer if they can. GeraldWL 12:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Is there a question?

 2600:1700:5DD0:7960:2C43:4437:19C8:B5BD (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

You provide the question, my friend, and we'll provide the answer (so long as it relates to problems in editing Wikipedia)! Nick Moyes (talk) 14:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

How would I get permission to use an image, and how would I verify that permission on the image page

How would I get permission to use a copyrighted image? and if I managed to get permission, how would I be able to show that I had permission to use the image on Wikipedia? Omniscientmoose42 (talk) 14:07, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

You having the permission means nothing because you're not hosting the image. See WP:Donating copyrighted materials. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 14:11, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Omniscientmoose42 (talk) 14:20, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Timeline question

Hello! I wanted to ask when detailing a historical timeline, are both formats correct as follows:

1. Megalodon (Otodus megalodon),[6][7][8] meaning "big tooth", is an extinct species of shark that lived approximately 23 to 3.6 million years ago (mya), during the Early Miocene to the Pliocene.

2. Megalodon (Otodus megalodon),[6][7][8] meaning "big tooth", is an extinct species of shark that lived approximately 3.6 to 23 million years ago (mya), during the Early Miocene to the Pliocene.

Or, is one format "more correct" than the other?

I appreciate your time. Krobbyzw (talk) 09:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Krobbyzw:　I think #1 is preferred. MYA is a place in time, rather than a quantity. Also see this BBC article which use the same convention. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 10:07, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Krobbyzw: Whilst Ganbaruby was quite right to point out that you give dates of a species' existence from earliest to latest, not vice versa, I would comment on poor positioning of inline citations in both examples. Far better would either be to put all citations at the end of the sentence, or place them just after each statement they support. Thus, in my suggestion below, ref 6 supports the meaning of the name, whilst 7 and 8 support the time period the taxon was extant:

• Megalodon (Otodus megalodon), meaning "big tooth",[6] is an extinct species of shark that lived approximately 23 to 3.6 million years ago (mya), from the Early Miocene to the Pliocene.[7][8]

Does that sound better to you? I also feel that 'from' is more appropriate than 'during'. Regards,  Nick Moyes (talk) 13:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Looks like an improvement to me. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:27, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Website advertised here as enthusiast website, seems more like a terrorist group of internet trolls

Wikipedia I have went to a website which I found on Wikipedia.... in the description on your website, you sent me to a website that's suppose to be a support forum... but when I got there asking for support, it's very clear that the website has been hijacked by a terrorist group of some sort, as nearly every member there starts cussing and belittling me, telling me I need to leave, all because I asked a support question.

Wikipedia can you remove this page or at least make sure people know that this website is not a safe website? You advertise it one way but when you get into the website, you get attacked because everything on your website giving info about this other website is WRONG as this comes off more like a terrorist group of sissies, rather than an enthusiast website.

mopedarmy is the page.

I will be continually contacting your team and your website until you change this, as you were the one that sent me there with bad info like it was a helpful group. 2600:1004:B092:32B5:14F2:835A:1EA3:C274 (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

If you're referring to the article Moped Army, the only external link found on the site goes to https://www.mopedarmy.com/, which as far as I can tell is still the official site of the group and therefore belongs in the article. I'm sorry that you had a bad experience on their website and their users, but that has nothing to do with Wikipedia, and there's nothing we can do about it. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

IP editor, Wikipedia can neither advertise a website nor warn against it; if there is content in an article that reads like advertising, that should be changed, but I can't really see that in Moped Army. If there is criticism against them published in reliable sources that can be included in the article, but you would have to provide those sources – you can't just add your own opinions, positive or negative. If you have specific suggestions for changes to the article, you can post them to Talk:Moped Army. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 16:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

(note: the IP has been blocked for posting this same message repeatedly.) --bonadea contributions talk 17:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Problem

What is the "Info Box" at the top of the page, and how do I make the code? For example, At the top of this page it has the (more fancy version, but still what i'm talking about) it says "Please enter a title in the subject line, then explain your question in the box beneath it..." or whatever it says... I'm seeing if I want to write a new article, (see my sandbox) and I don't want anyone to confuse it with the huge (as in, it must be moved around on a machine, i.e. train, truck, skid-steer, etc) and commercial snowblowers. I wanted have one that said something to the likes of "not to be confused with..." or whatever. In truth, maybe I should just write it in the article itself... anyhow. Thanks for your help! Cheers, Shadowblade08 (talk) 22:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC) Shadowblade08 (talk) 22:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Shadowblade08, I believe you're referring to hatnotes. Zindor (talk) 22:34, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Shadowblade08 (talk) 22:37, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

@Shadowblade08: As always, if you want to see how something is done, look at the source code of the article (i.e., with the "Edit" or "View source" tab). There can also be a "Group notice" and/or "Page notice" with links to them near the top right of the page (which is where your example comes from); they are shown when someone tries to edit the page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

How to deal with a user adding false information to an article

There is an IP user (User:216.66.16.234) who inserts false information on articles about the Conan stories by Robert E. Howard (for example Rogues in the House). Comparing his edits with the story itself (freely available on Gutenberg), one can see glaring inaccuracies (for example, an ear is not a written threat, and the story makes no mention of a roasted duck). However, this is not obviously vandalism - the user may be well-intentioned, even if he makes the article worse. What would be the correct procedure?

I've tried to write messages on his user talk page, but gotten no response. I've also made an edit to this specific article talk page, but no response yet (since I only made it a few minutes ago). I'm afraid we've both exceeded 3RR today; I will make an effort not to do that again. 88.89.96.120 (talk) 17:32, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi 88.89.96.120 – I have looked at a number of 216.66's contributions and it seems like somebody who is changing random things just for the hell of it, which is a form of vandalism (and thus exempt from 3RR). See for instance this, which doesn't only make random changes to the plot description (crocodile-infested river, forsooth!) but also removes the short description, and changes the URL to Gutenberg – the old URL was correct, but the one 216.66 inserted doesn't exist. Their talk page is full of warnings about these kinds of edits, and I'd suggest reporting them to WP:AIV at this point. --bonadea contributions talk 18:13, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion. I was unsure whether it counted as obvious vandalism, but I guess the fact that he's done this on various articles (not just Conan stories) is a strong hint.88.89.96.120 (talk) 18:41, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:ANI might indeed have been a better place to report the not-that-extremely-obvious-to-everyone vandalism, but WP:AIV did at least cause me to deal with the issue. Blocked for a year. Thanks for the report and helping the reporter. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Ping?

How do I ping a user? Wikipidean's Creed (talk) 19:56, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Wikipidean's Creed: like this: {{re|USERNAME}} RudolfRed (talk) 19:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @RudolfRed: :D Wikipidean's Creed (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Gaining understanding

I don't really understand Sarasotaball (talk) 21:34, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sarasotaball, welcome to the Teahouse. What is it you don't understand? Regards, Zindor (talk) 21:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

If you are unsure how to contribute to Wikipedia, might i recommend the tutorial for newcomers. Let us know if you need further assistance, we're here to help. Zindor (talk) 21:44, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Sarasotaball: Also check out the interactive learning game at WP:ADVENTURE RudolfRed (talk) 22:24, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Help

Sources ?👀Gremista.32 (talk) 00:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC) 

If you have a question about sources, feel free to ask it. -- Hoary (talk) 01:50, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

👀Gremista.32, You seem to be adding sources which are either not reliable or else do not support the statement which they follow. That's why so many of your edits get reverted. Please read Citing sources, along with the pages it links to, in order to properly add source citations to Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

G7 an Article Too Drastic?

Hello dear contributors,

I have a question and would be grateful for any kind of help. A user has suggested that I G7 the draft for an article (SCOTT DADICH) my boss was working on and start anew now that I have disclosed my affiliation. I wanted to check with the community if me choosing to G7 a draft will result in me not being able to create a new one from my profile, how long the process of G7 usually takes, is this move too dramatic and should I try something else first? Thank you for your guidance. I aim to create a fair unbiased article and look forward to better understanding the process.

Best, Anya

--Anya Kurkina (talk) 22:40, 25 October 2020 (UTC) Anya Kurkina (talk) 22:40, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Anya Kurkina: Hello. Having your draft deleted under G7 will not stop you from being able to create one in the future. If you want the draft to be deleted, there would be no problem in having it deleted. Usually an administrator will delete it soon after you tag it, however it can depend on how long this may take. Usually it will not take long. Best, --IWI (talk) 23:22, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Should news be on Wikipedia?

Hello. Should news about a murder, tragic as it is, have its own article on Wikipedia? I stumbled upon this page, Murder of Alex Woodworth. While the event did receive a lot of media attention, plenty of other such events take place almost on everyday, and many do receive news coverage. Surely, they can't all have Wikipedia pages. Merzash (talk) 00:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Merzash Any topic will merit a Wikipedia article if it receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources showing how the topic is notable. That includes murders. Generally, the coverage should be widespread and not confined to the local area. In the case of the article you cite, it is one line with one source, which does not demonstrate notability. 331dot (talk) 00:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, all right then. I'll edit that article. Thank you. Merzash (talk) 00:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikicode

I want to make a article on here but I'm not good at how to do that. Can anyone help? UB Blacephalon (talk) 19:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi UB Blacephalon, it's nice to see you again. The best way to start an article is through the Articles for Creation process, where you can submit your draft article for review by experienced editors.

While we're both here, maybe I can help you start the draft of your first article. Do you have any topics in mind? Zindor (talk) 19:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

I can do some research and writing, too. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 20:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, since I'm a Pokemon fan, I was thinking about doing a Porygon,Porygon2, Porygon-Z, Farfetch'd or Sirfetch'd article if I can. I tried doing an article about Porygon multiple times with no success. UB Blacephalon (talk) 21:23, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

UB Blacephalon, if your article-creation focus is to create articles on minor Pokemon characters, you have been informed previously that Wikipedia does not consider them WP:Notable. That is still the case now, meaning that Wikicode is the least of your worries. You must first come up with 2-3 reliable, independent, published sources for an article, to demonstrate its subject's notability. If other editors think your sources are good enough, then they (and you) won't be wasting time coding an article.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:15, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Blacephalon, i echo the above. While I would encourage you to create articles on subjects you enjoy, Pokémon species articles are very few in number, the reasoning for which was pointed out. There seems to be a stable consensus on not opening Pandora's Pokébox.

There's specific lists of articles that need creating, but the challenge is finding subjects of interest.

If you'd like to create an easy article and get used to wiki markup, i can find an Indian village for you to write about. Regards, Zindor (talk) 22:42, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Now I'm not trying to be nagging, and I understand the fact that most Pokemon are not suitable to write about, but I have a feeling that that sirfetch'd has notable references to talk about. My problem is what counts as a reliable source. If all else fails, Zindor, I would love to create that article. UB Blacephalon (talk) 00:00, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok. Well there's no harm in beginning a draft and seeing where it goes. Once you've made a start just drop a link and I'll certainly take a look and see what I can do to help. Zindor (talk) 00:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Of course! I'll do it as soon as I can! UB Blacephalon (talk) 00:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I've made what I think is a start. It has no title and has a few sentences but i think its a start. Here! UB Blacephalon (talk) 00:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

By "a few", you mean "two". It's not a start. I quote Quisqualis above: "You must first come up with 2-3 reliable, independent, published sources for an article, to demonstrate its subject's notability." Presenting at least two such sources for an article of at least two paragraphs: that would be a start. -- Hoary (talk) 01:24, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well what counts as a source and how do I put all my info down and organized? I want to make it look good for a start. UB Blacephalon (talk) 01:51, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia defines the types of sources it considers reliable in Wikipedia:Reliable sources, but that's jsut some general information that might not always be clear when it comes to a certain specific sources or specific types of articles. In such cases, you can ask for input at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Since you seem to want to create an article about a Pokemon character, you can try asking for feedback from the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokemon. If you want some general information on how to create articles or how to format references try Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:58, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, alright I'll check those out and get back to you with what I've done. UB Blacephalon (talk) 02:05, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

A lot of other video games are notable, but just don't really have an article yet. I was gonna create 60 Parsecs!, but set it aside just due to a lack of interest right now. Alternatively, you can also be a major contributor to other expandable articles, such as Pokémon Café Mix, for example, to get a good kickstart before taking on an article. I like to monitor Super Mario Bros. 35, for example. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 02:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Well if I can contribute to Pokemon or chemistry ( though I'm not too smart about it but it does interest me), I'm in! I just want to feel like I want to be involved more and like I'm doing something that helps the community out in a way, ya know? UB Blacephalon (talk) 03:50, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion, Blacephalon, you can help the community and add value to Wikipedia far more by improving some of the thousands of existing articles that are inadequately referenced - or by showing that the references for them do not exist, and getting them deleted as non-notable - than by adding yet another new article of doubtful notability. I understand the desire to make your mark by creating a new article - I remember feeling it myself, when I was new - but most of the time our efforts are better spent elsewhere. --ColinFine (talk) 12:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I feel like editing existing articles arent really doing anything, but I could be wrong. As for references, I'm not sure what sites are notable enough. UB Blacephalon (talk) 15:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Zindor, I've updated a lot on the Sirfetch'd draft. Is it viable now? Here! UB Blacephalon (talk) 20:37, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

UB Blacephalon Hi, good to see you're getting the hang of things. The reference style you are using is very old school and prone to linkrot. Consider using citeweb templates with the archive parameter. I'll convert one ref so you can see. The sources seem ok to me for the purpose you are using them for: verifying your prose. There's still some information you need to add citations to. I can't see an indication yet that this topic is important/notable enough to need a standalone article, especially considering the current consensus to keep the majority of Pokemon as list entries. The questions i would ask are: has Sirfetch'd gone meta in society like Mudkip did? Has there been coverage of the character for non-Pokemon reasons, perhaps controversy like that described at Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam? Outside of Pokemon Go and the debut games, what other media formats has Sirfetch'd featured in?

This is a good opportunity for you to practice your skills, even if the draft doesn't end up being published. Try adding an infobox and see how that goes. I'll be here if you need a hand. Regards, Zindor (talk) 13:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Colin is right that there is a lot more to Wikipedia than creating articles. Everyone has their own strengths. There are various creatures used to describe the style of editors: one example would be the WikiGnomes who often make small but important edits. Zindor (talk) 13:46, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, to your first question, Sirfetch'd has been featured in a lot of memes in the past so I'd say it is. Second, Just the memes but I'm sure I can find something. Third, what do you mean other media formats? UB Blacephalon (talk) 02:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

I mean like anime, magazines, television. The Pokemon species that do have articles here have been included in several formats. Zindor (talk) 21:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Zindor, does youtube count? Twilight wings has showed sirfetch'd and there has been many Leeks (Get it? :) ) on Farfetch'd's evolution. It has Merch, plushes and is in manga. UB Blacephalon (talk) 00:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Page creation help

Hi all I tried to make a page about the Lenovo USI pen, super small article it got rejected for copyright material and I can fix that easily enough, my question is, will the article be considered enough or is it not "important" enough for Wikipedia Thanks, Kaos KaosSquared (talk) 01:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC) KaosSquared (talk) 01:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello KaosSquared. An acceptable Wikipedia article will summarize significant coverage of the topic that has been published in independent reliable sources. Your draft has two references to Lenovo web pages. Those are not independent sources and therefore do not establish that the topic is notable. So, you need to find coverage of the Lenovo USI pen in other sources, like computer magazines or tech magazines. Start by removing the copyright violations, and then summarize what the independent sources say. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I needed that clarification, Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaosSquared (talk • contribs) 02:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Synthesis

Hello, what exactly qualifies as synthesis and what are some easy ways to detect synthesis? More specifically, the section here [7] seems to be engaging in some synthesis since the cited USA Today article makes no mention of Kevin McCarthy, nor does it state that saying 'China virus' or 'Wuhan virus' causes violence against Asian-Americans. Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 03:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d: When you see two sources that are combined to reach a conclusion not in either, that's synthesis (WP:SYNTH). In that article's case, I think it does qualify as synthesis, so I gave it a rewrite with better sources (Newsweek is a bit questionable). Let me know what you think. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Looks great! I also said in the talk page that Newsweek post-2013 isn't really a RS, but other users decided to keep it. Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 04:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d: I didn't notice the discussion. Newsweek isn't great, but when there's an AP article too, I'm going with that one. PBS works too. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!)

@Ganbaruby: I agree. One a related note, I had a question on notability. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the Post-1934 American Politics section, but I'm seeing a lot pages where a politician's vote on a particular law or bill is the only thing cited (usually from Congress.gov or whatnot). For example, back at Kevin McCarthy's page [8], the only source for 'Hate Crimes' is from clerk.house.gov, which simply lists his vote as "no." Shouldn't we generally avoid primary sources? And if no other RSs talk about it, is it notable? Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 05:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d: "Notability" has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia, so I'd avoid using that word for whether information belongs in articles (I usually go with "noteworthy"). But anyways, as you said, we want to have secondary sources backing up information because of due weight. I suggest you go to the talk page and get consensus there. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Seems good to me. Thanks for your help! Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (talk) 05:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

My first article

I've started writing my first article, but I don't understand very well how to go about someone reviewing it or publishing it once it's done. This is what I have so far: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Joe_Lazarus Am I doing it right? Donnaocchineri (talk) 21:31, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Donnaocchineri An editor has added a Submit button. Before triggering a review, remove all hyperlinks from the text of the article. I suggest you remove the Influences section. David notMD (talk) 21:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Will do. I can just move the information to another section right? About the hyperlinks, does that include internal links too or only external? Sorry about the silly questions but this is my first article. Thanks in advance. Donnaocchineri (talk) 05:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Josh Gray (rugby union) page

Hi

I'm new to constructing pages and wondered if there was anything else I need to do to the page i have constructed. Looking at the revision history an editor looks like they have reviewed but I think a bot has hidden categories and added transclusions (not sure what they are if I'm honest :). I assume categories are needed to allow the page to be searched.

Any help / guidance very welcome.

Thanks MelbourneWang6727 MelbourneWang6727 (talk) 05:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi MelbourneWang6727. I did some minor cleaning up of the article, but the Josh Gray (rugby union)#Early sporting achievements and education still needs more sources and a bit of rewriting to remove some of the puffery in the first paragraph. Try rewriting things in a more neutral tone. Since I don't know really anything about the sport of rugby union, I've asked the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby union to take a look at it and give it a more thorough assessment. However, it's not a bad first effort and you might want to consider joining WikiProject Rugby union or even Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league if that genre of article interests you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Photographs taken from Facebook

I'm working on creating a new biographical article. Can I use a picture of the person I'm writing the article about that has been posted on his social media accounts, like Facebook and is set as Public? Donnaocchineri (talk) 21:21, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Donnaocchineri, and welcome to the Teahouse. Almost certainly not, I'm afraid. With certain exceptions (which almost never apply for a picture of a living person), images used must be free for anybody to copy or modify for any purpose, commercial or not. A statement that a picture is "public" does not normally meet this requirement. See Uploading images. --ColinFine (talk) 23:11, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for answering. I can use it if I ask the owner of the profile for permission and he grants it, right? If I get the permission, should I credit it to that person's Facebook profile page then? Thanks in advance. Donnaocchineri (talk) 07:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

If you ask the copyright holder for their permission and they agree to give their consent, then you should upload the file Wikimedia Commons instead as explained here. However, you need try confirm that the person your asking is actually the copyright holder of the photo and didn't just upload a photo taken by another person to their Facebook account. Generally it's the person who takes a photo, not the subject of the photo, who holds the copyright over the photo. You also need to make sure that they fully understand and agree to c:Commons:Licensing and c:Commons:License revocation. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Question about Module map.

How i can Create a module map for an article? Mubashiir Channa (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mubashiir Channa if you mean Lua modules please see WP:Lua for guidance. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Jennifer Lopez Preview Page Wikipedia

When I did a yahoo search for Jennifer Lopez and it pulled up the Wikipedia preview page, it only listed ONE of her children, Emme. Max's name needs added to the preview page, so who can add his name to this preview page? ProChoiceLiberal (talk) 05:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@ProChoiceLiberal: Wikipedia has no control over what information shows up on Yahoo or any other search engine. The page we have at Jennifer Lopez does not list any of her children's names (WP:BLPNAME). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 05:43, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

ProChoiceLiberal, I checked Lopez's Wikidata page, since search engines sometimes draw from there, and it lists Max. So there's nothing more for us to add.

As a matter of general internet literacy, Yahoo search may not be the best search engine—Google search is generally considered much better. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Per WP:BLP we avoid naming non-notable relatives, particularly if they are minors. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

MinecraftKitty

Ummm there is a user with the user name MinecraftKitty it appears to be compromised by someone I believe an admin should take action. (If you don't see anything weird just check the contribution page of the user)

User:MinecraftKitty ◢  Creed  (Assasination contract me)

That user last edited in 2017. 331dot (talk) 08:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but yet we don't know if the hacker just thought hmmmmm maybe I should vandalize a bit! Just to keep safe {re|331dot}}. ◢  Creed  (Assasination contract me)

Could you remove the part of your signature that says others can contact you for assassinations? 331dot (talk) 08:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Sure but why, I'm not gonna assasinate someone for real @331dot:◢  Creed  (Talk!)

Wikipidean's Creed Because it is not appropriate for a public forum. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 08:59, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok sorry for wasting your time◢  Creed  (Talk!)

Vandalizing? Or giving opinions?

Ip user https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:150.129.238.196 Is making weird edits that are either giving opinions on an article but in an unacceptble way or vandalizing. I'm pretty sure he is vandalizing. ◢  Creed  (Talk!) Wikipidean's Creed (talk) 09:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, they made one edit that was appropriately reverted. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Article instructions to readers

I seem to recall that there is a guideline against using instructions to readers in articles, such as "(See below)" or "Please note XXX and YYY." Is this written into WP:PAG or was I imagining it? Elizium23 (talk) 20:09, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

I did not find the guideline on WP:PAG, nor on WP:MOS. Given that Wikipedia is frequently edited, often one paragraph or section at a time, such usage risks "orphaning" the instruction when "below" or "XXX" are modified to the point that the instruction no longer makes any sense. Surely, there oughta be a guideline somewhere...--Quisqualis (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Elizium23 and Quisqualis: MOS:NOTE. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

It is possible to wikilink within an article using the hashtag (#) to specify the target section, but some editors frown upon this. I use it sparingly.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 21:32, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

AlanM1, hmm, thanks. This is as I recall it, but it does not seem to explicitly rule out "see above/see below", only when such language is non-neutral. Elizium23 (talk) 23:52, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Elizium23: We have hatnotes like {{Further}} and {{Broader}} so I don't think there's a problem with the idea of "See", maybe just the specific active word. "Please note" is similarly active, even if only referring to another (part of the) article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• @Elizium23: In the case of images (which are placed differently depending on browser/screen), MOS:SEEIMAGE discourages "see above/right" instructions. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 10:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Images are being deleted although that are my own creation and capured by me

Hello Friends, I am creating a page which provides information about a popular game, the images i used to upload in that article were mine and i want it to be used for free for any purpose, it's getting deleted with a reason that i don't own it. How wiki editors are checking this? do they have any information about original author? this is really disappointing that my work is being declined by saying i don't own it. Sukrut5151 (talk) 09:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Sukrut5151, is the picture a screenshot of the game or the logo of it by any chance? If yes, is the game copyrighted/can you share a link to the logo photo? GeraldWL 09:52, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure what's happening there but you can contact the user who deleted and prove to him that you own that image. Or maybe it had a copyrighted logo @Sukrut5151: ◢  Creed  (Talk!)

Courtesy Link: Draft:ScarFall - The Royale Combat. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 09:59, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Sukrut5151 Appears the image was deleted from article because it was deleted at Commons as a copyright violation. Separate issue: when editing an article, it is helpful to briefly describe what was done in an Edit summary. This helps other editors find when something was changed, and what was changed. David notMD (talk) 11:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you all respected editors and Teahouse members I'll retry with your suggestions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sukrut5151 (talk • contribs) 11:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia has been criticized for its uneven accuracy [source: Wikipedia].

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

---

"Wikipedia has been criticized for its uneven accuracy" [source: Wikipedia]. Thought for today, and tomorrow, and the next day.

The article made about my life, work and career, after 3 years, is less than 50% complete. Is there any way to contact Jimmy Wales or Larry Sanger to ask them how it is possible to finally get an article to read correctly? At the moment the article does not serve any viewer truthfully as it is inaccurate, because it is incomplete and looks shoddy. I wonder, daily, how it is possible to get an article finished without having to tolerate editor's negative attitudes.

Note: I don't read emails from Wikipedia editors as I will no longer tolerate being accused of lying, accused of paid-editing, asked for an exchange of help in return for editing, and spoken down to.

I see that areas of the article require secondary and tertiary sources. If my work is published and archived by BBC News and obviously verifiable, why does it need to be also mentioned in other sources? This was never needed in the past so why now? Oh, editors are being awkward and pedantic again. Now there's a surprise.

Does Wikipedia believe in democracy (even though it feels as though most of you are Republicans), as it feels like a dictatorship here.

"Wikipedia's community has been described as cultlike,[105] although not always with entirely negative connotations.[source: Wikipedia] Not always?

Are there any female editors out there who might not be so ego-fueled, perhaps? Contact me via my website please.EddieLeVisco (talk) 10:26, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

As usual here is the courtesy link Ed Gold, these questions have been asked multiple times and the answers have been repeatedly ignored. You comment endlessly about how useless the volunteers at Wikipedia are but you have done nothing to help us, if there is content missing from the article please request for it to be added on the article’s talk page here Talk:Ed Gold], being sure to provide reliable secondary in-depth sources, it really is that simple. Theroadislong (talk) 11:14, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Repeated advice here at Teahouse and on your Talk page - which has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the people trying to advise you - is that as you are the subject of the article, you are strongly advised to not edit the article directly, but rather advised to propose specific changes, i.e., new content, at the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 11:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

User given warning for sexism. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Earlier this month User:Michael D. Turnbull made many valiant attempts on the Talk page of the article to identify references that could be considered reliable sources. The article was improved. However, appears there was a falling out, and he has moved on. Given your past behavior, I doubt any volunteer editor will take up your tasks. You were also advised that you could consider a paid editor, but that person would be required to declare being paid, and could only request changes at Talk rather than edit the article directly. David notMD (talk) 11:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

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

Articles

Are there any way to see and article you have to pay to see? 2603:301B:2702:AE00:4154:77D0:4AF7:7393 (talk) 20:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. You do not have to pay any money to Wikipedia to view an article. 331dot (talk) 20:43, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. If you are talking about a reference in a Wikipedia article that points to a paywalled source, you can ask at REX, and somebody may be able to help you see it. If you are asking about something not connected with Wikipedia, then I'm afraid we can't help here. --ColinFine (talk) 21:24, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

If you're a regular editor, then you may be able to gain access to The Wikipedia Library which includes a lot of works you'd otherwise have to pay to access. --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:22, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft feedback?

Hi everyone, I have a short Article that I will probably be submitting to AfC soon. I would love any feedback or edits you might have over on the draft or its associated Talk page. I'm a pretty new editor so apologies if it's a little funky. [9] TheMusicExperimental (talk) 05:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC) TheMusicExperimental (talk) 05:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

My first reaction is to wonder how your subject meets Wikipedia:Notability (music). -- Hoary (talk) 06:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hoary, see Draft talk:Yazmin Aziz (musician). {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

TheMusicExperimental, I made a few copy edits and added some categories, but overall that page looks perfectly ready for mainspace. You can choose to submit it through AfC if you want, but since the subject is clearly notable (which is the main thing AfC reviewers are checking for), I'd just move it directly to mainspace as soon as you're satisfied with it (it'll still receive a review from a New Page Patroller). Nice work! {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Sdkb!TheMusicExperimental (talk) 13:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Given that Draft:Yazmin Aziz (musician) is your first attempt at creating an article, I disagree with the advice to move it to mainspace directly. Going through AfC will take time for a review (as short as days, but sadly, as long as months), but better that than you move it to main and risk a New Page Patroller nominating it for Article for Deletion. Surviving AfD can be harder than dealing with a Decline at AfC, whereas succeeding via AfC supports article credibility. David notMD (talk) 11:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

That's sounds like great advice David notMD, I'll do it that way. TheMusicExperimental (talk) 13:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

retrieving password

Hi, I was wondering how you retrieve a forgotten password if you have only your username, thanks ! Ninonbmardisson (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Here you go! -> Help:Reset password Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 14:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!

Putting an image in an infobox

Hi, when I put an image inside an inforbox, what is a no no or rule in inserting an image? Does it need to be an image from an article related to the subject? thank you Clyeana-Clyde (talk) 11:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Most common beginner's error is using an image that is protected by copyright. David notMD (talk) 11:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

When trying to add an image, its best to use the Upload Wizard, a template which will guide you trough the steps to uploading an image. If you want to know all of the details, you can read this very long article about copyright policy. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 11:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Clyeana-Clyde: Images in a Infobox must (almost by definition) be directly about the subject. They may not be lifted and uploaded from copyrighted sites, so for that reason I have proposed this image you claimed to be your own for immediate deletion. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nick, can you help me delete the image, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyeana-Clyde (talk • contribs) 13:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

The image is marked for speedy deletion, so it should get deleted pretty soon (almost always under an hour). --Paul ❬talk❭ 13:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Paul thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyeana-Clyde (talk • contribs) 13:17, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Clyeana-Clyde: Can I ask, are you connected with the company, or know Ned Coten, or are being paid to create Draft:Ned Coten? If so, please could I ask you to read the following two shortcut links and, if appropriate, follow the instructions for declaring any conflict of interest you might have? See WP:COI and WP:PAID. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi again @Nick, thanks for responding to my inquiry. Kindly help me please to delete immediately the photo you're referring to be deleted so that the draft I made won't have a problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clyeana-Clyde (talk • contribs) 14:03, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Clyeana-Clyde: make sure you sign your posts! You can do so by adding 4 tildes. (~~~~) Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 14:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Should i rename my article

The name of my article is shown as 'Draft:Karikku'. Should I change into 'Karikku' and remove 'Draft' from it. Assassin7177 (talk) 15:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Assassin7177: No, you have submitted it for review, and if the reviewer accepts it, it will move to "mainspace", that is, the live encyclopedia, and the "Draft:" part will be removed then. (In fact, you can't move the article yourself, because the title Karikku has been protected so that only an administrator can create it.) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:48, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Changing the username

One of my co-editors suggested that my username showed violence, a statement I truly agree with, as it was a friend who created this account for me. I applied for changing the username and was granted permission in my 2nd attempt. From then on there has been no response and my username remains the same. I checked the Wikipedia page with this information, but I am still not satisfied with the information I got. I request the Teahouse-editors to help me out. Assassin7177 (talk) 15:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Assassin7177, it looks promising but FWIW everyone is a volunteer and sometimes things take time. It looks like you only made the request 3 days ago. Just be patient. —valereee (talk) 16:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Editing my name!

I left off one letter in my name and there doesn't seem to be any way to fix this!

Also, I don't understand how I am going to get an answer to this question.

Deena Stryker (not, Deena Stryke)! Deena Stryke (talk) 00:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Deena Stryke As you have almost no contributions, I would suggest that you just create a new account. 331dot (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Deena Stryke:, you can have your username changed by following the instructions here at WP:CHUS. Merzash (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Merzash Generally, if a user has few or no contributions, especially if not to articles, they should just create a new account. 331dot (talk) 00:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

331dot Thanks for the clarification. Merzash (talk) 00:47, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Deena Stryker has been registered since 2006, though. Elms^super 04:59, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Doesn't look like they've made any global contributions per meta? The user could request usurpation, instructions here. —valereee (talk) 16:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

New to all of this...Creating a wikipedia for my client..any suggestions??

How do I create a wikipedia for my client? Parisontitusbrand (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Parisontitusbrand, please see Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Help:Your first article - this pages both contain important details and help for you to get started. Be aware that you will still be subject to the same review process as everyone else :) Ed talk! 16:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Renaming articles

How do you rename articles? Piulin (talk) 16:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Click on the move button in the top right corner. You can also move it to other sections here (such as from article to draftspace). Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 16:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Piulin, however, the button will only appear once you are autoconfirmed. Dylsss^{(talk • contribs)} 16:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

ok, thanks. Piulin (talk) 18:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Piulin: If you need help with a page move, post a request at WP:RM RudolfRed (talk) 17:22, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

thx Piulin (talk) 18:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

HELP! making a article on an underground, relatively new record label

Good day, I have a question about my article.

It is about a new independent record label Hamage Records. (see draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hamage_Records) Previously, I asked how to submit my article for publishing. I was told the page most likely would end up being deleted. I have searched everywhere and there aren't a lot of sources on this label currently (it is understandable, as they are just starting up) except for youtube links, links to their music, and links to some interviews done by their artists. I would like to make sure this page is top notch, as I would like to help the label build a bigger fanbase. Is there anyone here who can give me tips or help me find ways to make this page more creditable in the eyes of Wiki?

Many thanks Musicnewgen3ration (talk) 18:03, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Musicnewgen3ration, Wikipedia articles require significant coverage in reliable sources. If there is no such coverage, the record label likely isn't notable by Wikipedia standards. This means the record label isn't ready for a Wikipedia article yet. —valereee (talk) 18:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Musicnewgen3ration, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that if "there aren't a lot of sources on this label currently" then it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article is possible. Like many people, you probably have the misconception that Wikipedia has anything at all to do with telling the world about something new: Wikipedia is only interested in what independent people have published about a subject (that is, people not connected with the subject), and if there is little or no such material then there is nothing which can be put in the article. "Help[ing] to build a bigger fanbase" is an example of promotion, which is forbidden on Wikipedia. In the case of your label, it is probably also TOOSOON. Please do not spend any more time and effort on this, unless you can find at least three places where people who have no connection with Hamage, and have not been prompted or fed informtion by or on behalf of Hamage, have published significant coverage of it in reliable sources: if you do, you will be wasting your own time, and that of anybody who reviews your attempt. --ColinFine (talk) 18:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

a move button disappeared

I cannot find a MOVE button. I've been banned for 24h but it supposed to be gone by now but I still cannot see it. I want to publish my sandbox content and I need help. Thank You in advance. Jaroslaw Cichon (talk) 18:22, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

If you intend to move your draft into articlespace then you accept all the consequences of doing so, including article deletion (if it isn't up to snuff) and/or being blocked (if it's suspected you are a mercenary hiding their colours). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 18:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jaroslaw Cichon. You do not have a Move button because your account is not yet autoconfirmed: it has not existed for four days. But even if you have, please do not move your sandbox to mainspace: this will be a waste of your time and anybody's who has to deal with it, because your sandbox is absolutely nothing like a Wikipedia article. It has no references, and therefore does not establish that the subject is notable; and it hardly says anything about the subject anyway. Please read your first article in order to find out how to go about the very difficult task of creating an acceptable Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 18:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Jaroslaw Cichon, You're not autoconfirmed, so you can't move pages yet, and even if you did move it, I would nominate it for speedy deletion criteria A1, because in its current form, it isn't possible to tell what you're actually talking about. Also you haven't been blocked on this account, please don't create alternative accounts to evade blocks as that can be a form of socking. Dylsss^{(talk • contribs)} 18:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Recreate the same page

How can I recreate the same page. As a new user I wasn't aware of title line I thought that I misspelled the case sensative letters. Rockstar250802 (talk) 18:30, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Conflict of interest. You are related (family) or associated (boss, work, neighbor, good friend) with the subject at hand therefore your view could be reflected in the article and not what the acceptable sources report.104.35.254.90 (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

What is a COI?

Hi! I was wondering what a COI means? I tried to edit a Wikipedia article about my grandfather (who is an artist) since it’s a stub but my editing was removed since I couldn't provide a source. Diorthecat (talk) 18:41, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Disregard : Conflict of interest. You are related (family) or associated (boss, work, neighbor, good friend) with the subject at hand therefore your view could be reflected in the article and not what the acceptable sources report.104.35.254.90 (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Diorthecat: There is some information on your user talk page about what a conflict of interest (COI) means in the context of Wikipedia. Also keep in mind that just because something is true, it does not mean that it is appropriate to add it to an encyclopedia – for instance, family members of a notable person are usually not mentioned in the article about that person, unless they are also notable (and never if there is no source for the information.) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 20:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

im just a kin *Sobs*

 Spazzin321 (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, noted. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Zindor (talk) 20:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Titles or text

What is the style of WP concerning national football teams names/article names. Should it be a literal translation of the name from the original into English or an attempt to disregard that one not be of that nation to be included therefore to call it any particular European or South American country name such as Mexican for Mexico when the name is not in the original "can" but "co" or Brazil when it is Brasileira or Brazilian? Thank you.104.35.254.90 (talk) 19:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC) 104.35.254.90 (talk) 19:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP, welcome. The most common name in English sources is typically the chosen title. More specific guidance can be found at WP:UE. Regards, Zindor (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

mohammad bahrani long pendin

I've created the page Mohammad bahrani for almost 8 weeks but it is still pending. I am new here so can you tell me haw long it takes? is it normal? and if so how long it can take? نارا دلجو (talk) 17:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

It will be reviewed when it gets reviewed; 2 months is about average given how backlogged AfC is. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Takes a strong man to deny...} 17:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Link: Draft:Mohammad Bahrani

@نارا دلجو: FWIW, the fact that it was not quickly declined is usually good – that usually means that it doesn't fail on any major grounds (notability, copyright, etc.). However, having said that, I see that you have several references to IMDb, which is generally not considered to be a reliable source here (see WP:RS/P#IMDb). I would suggest removing those cites and finding better sources for the relevant statements. Also, while English-language sources are not required, as a practical matter, the lack of them can also contribute to the time to review, since it limits the likely reviewers to Farsi-speakers. Lastly, I'd encourage you to improve the references to a consistent format with as many of the important details as possible (author, title, website or publisher, date) (see WP:ERB for a quick primer on using the cite tool, which can also make it easier to get the right-to-left and left-to-right markers in the right places (cite 29 seems confused in this regard). I hope this helps. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I'm new!

I've spent all afternoon editing the page about PEROSH and adding lots of citations - it came up with a warning before that there weren't enough references. I checked each edit as I went along. Now all the changes have vanished. What can I do about this? MT at PEROSH (talk) 21:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

 MT at PEROSH (talk) 21:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

MT at PEROSH, so, it looks like you might be someone who works at PEROSH and have been assigned to write on Wikipedia about it? —valereee (talk) 21:50, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, apparently all my edits were removed by a user hiding behind the name 'Tradescantal'. Why does wiki allow this?

 MT at PEROSH (talk) 21:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

 197.220.84.76 (talk) 21:42, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@MT at PEROSH: Because your edits were seen as promotional.

Before you do anything else, disclose your employment on your user page with the following template: {{paid|user=MT at PEROSH|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}

After that, try to just make edit requests at Talk:PEROSH instead of actually editing the article.

If you must edit the article for some really important reason (like your boss is holding a gun to your head or something), write as if you worked for a rival company. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:55, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• Note: This appears related to #Edits to PEROSH, about three hours earlier. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:43, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Userbox

What is that one "This user has been on Wikipedia for" userbox, and does it update automatically? Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 23:15, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Template:User Wikipedian For. Enter your start date in the parameters and it'll do the rest. Zindor (talk) 23:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Patrik Krivanek

Hello, my article was not approved as my submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Can you please guide me, what will be reliable sources for me as a film director and producer? I have many articles, interviews, and film pages to prove it. Thank you, Patrik. Dracekmiky (talk) 22:50, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Dracekmiky. You have the usual sort of problems of new editors who plunge straight into the difficult task of creating their first article without spending a few weeks or months learning their way around Wikipedia first, and improving some of our six million existing articles. See common sourcing mistakes specifically, and your first article more generally. Also, given the fact that you claim File:Patrik Krivanek.jpg as your own work, what is your relationship with Krivanek? You almost certainly have a conflict of interest, and perhaps also are a paid editor. If you are the latter, you must make a formal declaration of the fact, and understand that a Wikipedia article is not for the benefit of its subject, and most of the sources must be wholly independent of the subject of the article: Wikipedia has basically no interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves. --ColinFine (talk) 00:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

WP:BLP1E

How does WP:BLP1E apply to Sirhan_Sirhan? Charles Juvon (talk) 00:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Charles Juvon: as far as I can tell, it does not, because it fails point 3, just like the example of the Reagan shooter. RudolfRed (talk) 02:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

How can I access my rejected article?

Hello! I submitted an article recently, which was declined. Is there any chance I can access it again to make some changes to it? It tells me to go to Draft:Kateulina and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, but whenever I go to it, it mentions that my article has been moved or deleted. What can I do about this? Kateulina (talk) 02:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Kateulina: You can try asking at WP:REFUND to have it restored so you can fix it, but that request might be declined based on the reason it was deleted. RudolfRed (talk) 02:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Normally this is OK to suggest, but G11 deletions fall outside the scope of WP:REFUND. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kateulina. If you click on Draft:Kateulina, you'll see that it was deleted per speedy deletion criterion G11 by and administrator named Jimfbleak. This means that you can't access the content any longer. If you'd like more specific details as to why the draft was deleted you can ask them at User talk:Jimfbleak; however, when a draft is deleted by an administrator for such a reason, it's usually because the administrator felt that there were so many serious problems associated with the draft that it would be impossible to fix the draft so that it's in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft feedback: A Delay is Better (album by Pamela Z)

I noticed that only solo album by Pamela Z didn't have an Article and so I made a draft [10]and Talk[11] for it.

I'd love your feedback here or on the Talk page and absolutely welcome your edits. I haven't done an album Article for anything yet so I especially appreciate any experience someone might have.

Thanks! TheMusicExperimental (talk) 23:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi TheMusicExperimental. The draft you submitted to WP:AFC was accepted; so, A Delay is Better is now an article. Being accepted via AFC is usually (but not always) a good indication that the subject matter most likely meets WP:GNG and is deemed Wikipdedia notable, but it doesn't necessarily mean there aren't still issues which need addressing. So, you might want to ask someone from WP:ALBUMS to take a look at the article and assess it; generally, WikiProjects are a good place to ask for specific feedback because that's where you're likely to find editors who might be familiar with a certain subject matter or type of article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:45, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Technical help with fixing a tracking category

Hi all, hope that you're well! I am seeking some help fixing up a tracking category at {{Peer review}} and was hoping someone could help.

In brief, an editor puts {{Peer review}} on an article's talk page and then selects what type of peer review page they want. Then, a peer review page is created.

However there are often problems with this. I am trying to implement two tracking categories so I or a future bot can fix up some uses of this template. The code is on the template but not working. My aim is:

• If a peer review page isn't created, add the article to Category:Unopened requests for peer review
• If the template isn't used in the talk namespace, add the article to Category:Wikipedia peer reviews not in talk namespace

I have been having trouble implementing them and was hoping someone knowledgable around here may be able to help :). Tom (LT) (talk) 23:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Tom (LT), you may be better off asking your technical question at WP:VPT, The Village pump technical questions page on Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

@Tom (LT): If I understand your question correctly: you can add the category to the current page if pagename does not exist with:

{{#ifeq:{{PAGEID:pagename}}|0|[[Category:Unopened requests for peer review]]}}

To add the category to the current page if it is not in the Talk namespace:

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Talk||[[Category:Wikipedia peer reviews not in talk namespace]]}}

—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems that pagename is Wikipedia:Peer_review/{{PAGENAME}}/archive{{{archive|}}}? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 06:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Citation changes

If a citation URL redirects to a new URL (eg. an organisation updates its website URL although the content of web page is still relevant) - is it best to add a new citation for the new URL next to the old citation, or should the existing citation be updated to include new URL and retrieval date? There may also be updates to the associated Wikipedia text based on the updated webpage used in the citation. Gobiidae (talk) 03:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gobiidae. Wikipedia doesn't necessarily delete no longer accessible citations for the reasons given in WP:DEADREF. So, in my opinion, if the "old" url is no longer accessible, then you can probably treat it as a "deadlink" and try to find an archived version of it. You can then update the WP:ACCESSDATE (i.e. "retrieval date") parameter and other relevant parameters accordingly. If you're absolutely certain that the old source and the new source are identical not only in content but in the context used and that only the url has changed, then you probably could simply just replace the url and tweak the other citation parameters as needed. If the old source and the new source are different, however, then it might be better to cite them separately. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Marchjuly --Gobiidae (talk) 07:17, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Canis dirus trouble

I am sorry, but I am very annoyed and worried. On the Canis page, the list of species did not include C. dirus, and when I added it as a species, I later got a notification that I may be blocked from editing if I did anything else bad. Can you help me? Procyon 2.0 (talk) 21:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Procyon 2.0: The word "extant" means "still around." It does not mean "extinct," which means "not around." ExtAnt and extInCt are not the same word. Dire wolves are extinct, not extant. That's why your edit was reverted as vandalism. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree that that was why your edit was reverted, Procyon 2.0, but I cannot see in the least why William Harris warned you for vandalism. It looks to me like a good-faith, but slightly mistaken edit. The earlier edits to Liopleurodon, Kepler-17b and Betelgeuse also look like inappropriate but good-faith changes by somebody who is keen to contribute, but rushes into editing without learning how Wikipedia works. Care to comment, William? --ColinFine (talk) 22:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I concur with your assessment Colin, and have apologised on Talk:Procyon for my over-reaction. The earlier string of escalating warnings on that Talk page were not all for vandalism, and your observation about Betelgeuse not actually being vandalism is correct. William Harris (talk) 07:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Capital Punishment

Hey- I'd like to get some feedback on Talk:Capital punishment. Is there a Wikipedia policy rule against using colors in a map on Wikipedia in away that is not neutral? Geographyinitiative (talk) 19:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC) Geographyinitiative (talk) 19:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

illustrating statistics by color is not a bias. Facts are not always pretty.104.35.254.90 (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Geographyinitiative, I'm not sure what you're asking. Can you clarify what you mean by "colors in a map on Wikipedia in a way that is not neutral"? —valereee (talk) 21:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

As the OP says on the linked talk page, they object to the color scheme in File:Capital_punishment_in_the_world.svg, where countries that practice the death penalty are in red, countries that have statutes allowing it are in orange, and countries that ban it are in blue. While I frankly doubt that the color scheme amounts to bias, there would be a case for better accessibility to go from darker to lighter colors (or the other way around) down the list of legends. Right now, both extremes (death penalty allowed or banned) are the darkest colors, which makes it hard to interpretate for color-blind readers (to see a black and white version, go to [12] -> "contrast" tab -> desaturate page). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Is it considerable as a reliable source ?

I found [13] it was an article This which was deleted because it was having promotional publications, though I found [14] from Dinesh Lal Yadav so my question is shall I consider it as reliable or promotional? as there is no bylineDtt1^Talk 07:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Question-2 - if there is an article which is on a reliable source but is an interview so can it be considered as reliable, can we use it ?

If I understand Q1 correctly, DJ Felix was deleted via AfD even though it had a ZEENEWS reference, and you are now asking if a different ZEENEWS article can be a reliable source reference for a different person. Answering requires someone who knows reputation of Zee Media Bureau. David notMD (talk) 08:11, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Even if an interview is published in what's generally regarded as a reliable website/magazine/newspaper, what the interviewee says in the interview normally isn't usable. See Wikipedia:Interviews. As for Zee News, unfortunately it goes unmentioned in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, and there's no clear and recent discussion in the archives of WP:RSN. I suggest that you ask about it on WP:RSN. My own reaction to what's said in the article Zee News (and particularly from the content of what's now its seventh endnote) would be to avoid it as a source for any material that might have political ramifications. -- Hoary (talk) 08:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

What to do with dead links?

What would be the first action taken when seeing permanent dead links? Should it be removed immediately or taken care of in an alternative way? And si there a difference between "broken" and "dead" links? Apollogone (talk) 10:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC) Apollogone (talk) 10:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Links taggged as permanentely dead should not be removed. Instead, they should be replaced with an alternative link that is working and supporting the content in question. AFAIK the terms "broken" and "dead" are often mixed up, howewer, "dead" is used to adress more permanent failures, while "broken" referes to links that are temporarely unavailable due to server overloads, temporary server misconfiguaration (such as expired SSL certs) or similar reasons. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Publishing A Page?!?

Hi, I am looking to publish a page that has been in my drafts for about a week now. I do not have a publish button, although I have been on wiki for some time now. How do I get the page reviewed and published?

Do I need to allow more time? Correctioncontributer (talk) 11:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Correctioncontributer Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added the appropriate information to your draft to allow you to submit it for a review. However, if you were to do so, I think that it would be rejected. This is because it does little more than tell of the company and what it does. Wikipedia articles (not just a "page") must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Brief mentions, name drops, announcements of routine business, interviews, and other primary sources do not establish notability. Please see Your First Article for more information.

If you are associated with this company in some way, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on formal disclosures you could be required to make. 331dot (talk) 12:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Correctioncontributer. Drafts aren't automatically published; you either (1) need to do so yourself or (2) submit the draft to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review. I wouldn't suggest you try and do (1) unless you've got an established track record of creating viable articles. Lots of new editors try (1) only to see their work tagged or nominated for deletion (sometimes rather quickly) because it's not considered to meet the basic criteria for a Wikipedia article. So, (2) might be your best option since it will given an experienced AfC reviewer a chance to look over the draft and assess whether it has what it takes to be a viable article. If the reviewer feels it does, they will move the draft to the WP:MAINSPACE; if not, the reviewer almost always explains why and sometimes even suggests things that need to be approved. Having a draft declined by a reviewer is not the end of the world and you can resubmit for another review again as long as you don't keep resubmitting the same declined version. Since you're draft seems to be about a company, you might want to look at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for some general idea as to what types of things an AfC reviewer is going to be looking for when they assess the draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Edits to PEROSH

Hi, I'm new! I've spent all afternoon editing the page about PEROSH and adding lots of citations - it came up with a warning before that there weren't enough references. I checked each edit as I went along. Now all the changes have vanished. What can I do about this?  PEROSH2 (talk) 18:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

It looks like you had a number of edits removed as they were made with a conflict of interest. I'd take a look at the guidance on conflicts with particular reference to declaring them properly and then making appropriate edit requests on the article's talk page. --Paul ❬talk❭ 20:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

• Note: This seems to be related to #Hi, apparently all my edits were removed by a user hiding behind the name 'Tradescantal'. Why does wiki allow this?, about three hours later. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi yes I've had a mail to say I have to make a declaration that it is paid content. It's not but I'll see if I can construct a declaration that is truthful - ie doesn't say it is paid content. I used the username PEROSH2 to make my affiliation crystal clear. I'm still trying to find my way around the system! I'm on holiday and can't spend much more time on this so if that doesn't work will give up. As anyone who looks at my edits will see, I've been adding in lots of external references (ie things not published by PEROSH) which is what the existing page has marked up as being short of. PEROSH is a partnership of national research institutes for occupational health and safety. It's vision is use of scientific evidence to inform the work of policymakers at national, European and global level.So for example at the moment scientists in the member institutes are providing scientific evidence that is being used to inform the national covid response. I guess a partnership of scientists set up to share knowledge between national institutes, work together on projects, and with a vision on use of scientific evidence to save workers lives and protect their health just doesn't fit the boxes wiki has. Will have a go at the declaration if I can navigate to the page. Alternatively if one of the wiki editors can go through and decide if they want to add in any of the external references I've cited (things like publications in the British Medical Journal on occupational health) that would be great MT at PEROSH (talk) 12:14, 27 October 2020 (UTC) .

Extinct or extant

Hi, it is me again, Procyon 2.0, with another question. I know the difference between extant and extinct, extant meaning in existence, and extinct meaning the opposite.But how do I mark a species as extinct? Procyon 2.0 (talk) 12:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Procyon 2.0: this is about your edits to Canis, yes? The point is that you added the species to a list headed "Extant species". It would need a separate heading "Extinct species". I don't know if there is a special way to do that: you'd have to look at Template:automatic taxobox. --ColinFine (talk) 13:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

The dodo is (famously) extinct. Go to the article dodo, prepare to edit it, look in the infobox, copy the relevant property–value pairs, copy them into the article you want to edit, get your browser to go back from editing dodo. -- Hoary (talk) 13:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Christina Borum

I just want a wiki page. As a published author, I know I am not famous but I think that once you google my name I come up no one else. My books come up, my information comes up and that should be enough for a page right? Christina35221 (talk) 20:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

@Christina35221: See WP:NAUTHOR for the guidelines on articles about authors. If you fit, you can make request at WP:RA RudolfRed (talk) 20:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

There is a declined autobiography here Draft:Christina Borum with zero reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, existence is not a criteria for inclusion in WP. It is "notability" based on a specific type of information, recognized authorities that publish very credible news and information. Get the national and international press to comment about you, your industry or profession, not merely what can be self published.104.35.254.90 (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, not to nitpick, @104.35.254.90:, but there's no such thing as A criteria. There might be many criteria. Or ther might be A criteriON. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:08, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Christina35221, nobody in the entire world has a Wikipedia article, not even Jimbo Wales. Wikipedia has articles about notable people (and other notable subjects). If Wikipedia at some time has an article about you, it will not belong to you, it will not be for your benefit, you will not have control over the content, it may or may not say what you would like it to say, and it will be almost entirely based on what people with no connection to you have published about you, not on what you say or want to say. That is because Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a publicity outliet. --ColinFine (talk) 21:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

SandBox Content

Hi Teahouse, I would like to ask your guidance on what to write in a sandbox? maybe you can share some samples.

Thanks Dil Dilthor (talk) 13:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

The point of the sandbox it to write, or do, whatever you want with it. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

However, its a good place to start draft articles before they are submitted for review. Wikipedia:Requested articles is a place where articles are sorted into a category, so pick one that interests you. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

But keep in mind that certain policies, such as copyright and harassment, still applies to the sandbox. You shouldn't also take benefit of the sandbox to make Wikipedia a promotional or social media platform. GeraldWL 13:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I use my Sandbox to be sure that I have properly created a reference before pasting it into an article. And if I intend to revise a section of an article, I copy it into my Sandbox, work there, then paste back. David notMD (talk) 14:44, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Interesting. I use it to transform paragraphs or infoboxes that would take much time (i.e. the sidebar at COVID-19 pandemic), or to make drafts.

Grammar Flaws

When one of the most important issues in Wikipedia is related to grammar issues, and many articles have clear grammatical flaws, why correct these flaws faced the reverted and the message of managers to not correct these flaws? Arvinwikiedit (talk) 14:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

While you did fix some grammatical issues, you did introduce wording that wasn't correct in some cases. Instead of manually going through and fixing the changes, the users just revert the whole thing. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 14:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

You have been advised on your Talk page that in many instances the grammar or spelling was correct before your changes, or there may be a choice, with both corrrect. For example, see Serial comma. David notMD (talk) 14:50, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Byte deducted

Hi I'm Mhiz Destiny i reverted someone's edit and my byte was deducted I do not know if I did the right thing or not please I need advise Mhiz Destiny (talk) 15:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems to be the edit made on [15]Jerusalema. You removed an external hyperlink, thinking it was a typo. Read up on the article linked to learn how it works and how to script it. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 15:39, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Trying to understand whether or not it's okay to use a company logo or not

Hi all! So I've recently started developing the page Stonewell Cider. I know it's a long way from finished, but I have plenty of stuff that I'm going to tack on in the coming weeks before I submit it for publication. My question is whether or not I can put its logo on the page or not. I read WP:LOGO but honestly couldn't really make heads or tails of it. Thanks in advance! Xx78900 (talk) 10:12, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Xx78900 Hello and welcome. As I understand it(and you might wish to wait for some other opinions), company logos can be used as fair use, but must be uploaded to Wikipedia directly and not Commons(where fair use images aren't allowed). 331dot (talk) 10:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

331dot Thanks for the reply! I think I'll upload the image then as the page remains only a draft for now anyway. If someone comes along with a good reason for deleting it, I'll do so. Cheers! Xx78900 (talk) 10:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Xx78900: Please see WP:DRAFTS#Preparing drafts for more details, but non-free content cannot be used in drafts. If you add such a file to a draft, it will be promptly removed per non-free content use criterion #9. My suggestion to you would be to first get the draft you're working on approved, and only then start worrying about adding a logo for the company to it. It's matters not whether the draft has a logo in it; it only matter whether the company you're trying to create an article about is deemed to meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, Xx89000. Your question is like "Please tell me how I can build a turret on this house that I haven't yet found a plot of land to build it on. --ColinFine (talk) 12:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Thanks for the reply! And cheers I'll leave off the logo for now then no worries, I did read through but I didn't clock hat drafts didn't count as articles, my bad. I'm fairly confident it will be considered notable when it comes through as it is discussed at length in a variety of national newspapers so I think it will pass. I'll hold off on the logo though. Cheers. And @ColinFine: I'm not sure my question was quite as extreme as you made out, nor deserving of a rude reply.Xx78900 (talk) 16:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Xx78900 By the way, Draft:Stonewell Cider goes to your draft whereas Stonewell Cider does not. And, in my opinion, minor/local organization awards do not contribute to notability in the Wikipedia sense of the word. David notMD (talk) 14:38, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and the advice, I'm still new to the whole thing! Yes, the smaller awards may not be notable, but I felt they were worthy of inclusion anyway, as they can be sourced. I have multiple sources from a variety of national newspapers discussing the company (or at least its roducts) in a non trivial manner, so notability shouldn't be an issue by the time I bring the article up to a stage where I feel comfortable submitting it. Cheers. Xx78900 (talk) 16:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Own page

Can someone change their own wikipedia like age or hometown etc Roberts Hogg (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Roberts Hogg, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to people editing the Wikipedia article about them (which is not their "own": it does not in any way belong to them) then the answer is No, they are strongly discouraged from directly editing the article, except to revert obvious vandalism (but some people interpret "vandalism" as meaning "anything I don't want in that article": this is not the meaning). People with a conflict of interest, including the subject of an article, are welcome to make an edit request on the article's talk page. See AUTOPROB for more. --ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Are LinkedIn, IMBd and Filmibeat reliable sources Atlantis77177 (talk) 16:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

LinkedIn and IMDB are definitely not, although we often include IMDB in an external links section i.e. not as a source. See WP:RSPSOURCES for the rationale behind each. I'm not familiar with filmibeat, but it would really come down to where they are sourcing their material from. --Paul ❬talk❭ 16:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

IMO Filmibeat looks very doubtful for at least anything WP:BLP-related. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Fadolín

Hi - what is the problem with the intro for the article of Fadolín? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Fadol%C3%ADn

? It says the intro is unsourced - but there are three sources, including the New York Times, a curated new music publication, and the American Viola Society.

This article is modeled on the article for the 5-string violin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-string_violin

The only difference here is that it is about a six string violin.

Thank you. ZabarSafari (talk) 00:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ZabarSafari, and welcome to the Teahouse. No, the difference is in the quality and independence of the citations: and that is far more important than almost anything else about the article. I haven't looked at them all (if you formatted them as citations rather than bare URLs they would be easier to evaluate - see REFB) - but the ones I have looked at are either not independent (classicalmpr.org, American Viola Society - and the latter is annoying without a page number) or just passing mentions (NYTimes). Please see WP:CSMN. --ColinFine (talk) 00:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

None of ref 1, 2 or 3 confirm the sentence "The name "fadolín" was etymologically derived by Ljova (Lev Zhurbin) as a portmanteau of FA-DO-vioLIN). David notMD (talk) 01:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

As a subscriber to the New York Times, I am always interested in looking at their coverage of a topic. This is what they had to say about this topic: "There was also a pensive piece for fadolin (a six-string violin) ..." That is a sentence fragment, or what is commonly referred to by Wikipedia editors as a "passing mention". What is required is significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. The General notability guideline says that:

"Significant coverage addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material."

So, the draft article needs references to reliable, independent sources that discuss this fadolín topic in detail. One reference in the draft describes the word as a neologism. Please be aware that Wikipedia does not accept articles about recently coined words. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree you -- the issue is that the sources for fadolín are right now rather disparate. The true origins of the name "fadolín" are that Ljova had a "baby-naming contest" for his new 6-string viola in 2008 (see ) and the winning answer was FAMIola -- a viola with a FA and a MI. By connection, if six-string viola-sized instrument with added FA and MI strings was a FA-MI-(vi)OLA, a violin with extra FA and DO strings became a FA-DO-(vio)LÍN. This has not been explained elsewhere, and the sourcing is murky.

However, the instrument builder Eric Aceto has built 26 of these instruments (by his count), and the naming convention of calling a 6-string violin a "fadolín" is becoming more common, see for example or and more generally --- so yes, most of the work is being spread on Facebook, though fadolín has also received mentions in the New York Times, and also in the New Yorker . It has also been used in an academic context at Princeton University . The body of work for the instrument is rapidly expanding.

Thank you for your guidance and patience! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZabarSafari (talk • contribs) 17:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Donald Trump

Your write up about Donald Trump seems very negative compared to Barack Obama or Joe Biden. Why is that? 90.253.183.164 (talk) 10:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Articles on Wikipedia are not positive or negative, they simply summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic. If you have changes to suggest that are sourced to independent reliable sources, please offer them at Talk:Donald Trump. Note that Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias; the sources are presented to the readers so they can evaluate them and judge them for themselves. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Articles on Wikipedia are not SUPPOSED to be positive or negative. Articles on Wikipedia are also written by human beings who, with the best of intentions, will still at least HAVE their individual biases and beliefs. I haven't read the articles in question here, but I hope no reasonable person would think that positivity/negativity could never happen in Wikipedia. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:19, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

AzseicsoK I should clarify that the intention is that articles are not positive or negative- and if the OP feels changes are needed that enhance that goal, they should propose them. However, if coverage in independent reliable sources is "negative", any Wikipedia article about the covered topic will be "negative" as well, irrespective of the biases of the editors. Article content will not be whitewashed. 331dot (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

331dot, I also note now that you DID make clear from the start that " ... Wikipedia does not claim to be free of bias ...," a caveat that I overlooked when I first looked to comment. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

AzseicsoK, to argue that everyone has a bias is not to say that the tone could be neutralized. Plus you're arguing in a professional tone to someone new to the Wikipedia customs. You know how people look at Wikipedia outside. "It's editable, don't trust it!" "It's not written by academics." "It's not a research paper!" "It sounds like a fandom site." When meeting such people, talk nicely-- after all, that's what Teahouse is. GeraldWL 17:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Gerald Waldo Luis actually, you make me see that I wasn't clear in my intent in my original statement. I wasn't talking to the new person; I was responding to the person who answered the new person. (And my second comment--on reflection, worded very badly) was meant to acknowledge that I didn't read all the way to the end of that second person's answer before I responded. I was picking apart something--a bit from the wrong sided, I admit. If I came off as "not nice" to the new person, I apologize. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Citing

Can I link to sources that are not publicly available, such as citing a research paper on a paid-for database? WildeViolets (talk) 17:35, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

WildeViolets, hello! Often yes, see WP:PAYWALL. JSTOR is a popular source around here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

approving page

Hi.

I'm not sure why my wiki page won't be approved? Arushi kapoor (talk) 18:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Your draft User:Arushi kapoor/sandbox was rejected, it has no sources and nothing to suggest that the subject is notable. Theroadislong (talk) 18:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Arushi kapoor, assuming you mean User:Arushi kapoor, that page is meant to write a little about what you do and like to do as a WP-editor (WP:UP), it is not a place to submit an article. If you want to try that, start at Help:Your first article. If this is about you or someone you work for, see WP:AUTOBIO and WP:COI first. WP:BLP and WP:TUTORIAL can also be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:15, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Notability

I am new here. I am thinking about writing an article here on Daniel Zdrodowski who is running for Circuit Attorney in the St. Louis Prosecutor election against Kim Gardner (the latter already has a wikipedia page).

My question is this : is Daniel Zdrodowski notable enough for a wikipwsia page? ce (talk) 19:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

ce, notability does not arise from candidacy for office, so, in the absence of notability as a person, no.--Quisqualis (talk) 19:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Charlie Emery (edit conflict) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Per the Wikipedia definition of a notable politician, merely being a candidate for office does not typically merit someone an article. There are very rare exceptions to that(such as Christine O'Donnell) but in those cases the candidate receives outsized coverage in independent reliable sources, far beyond a typical political candidate. If Mr. Zdrodowski wins his election, he would then meet the notability definition(even before he officially assumes office). If he is notable for something else, he could merit an article for that, which could then include the fact he is seeking public office. 331dot (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Remove imbedded link

I was looking at the state of Georgia's 128th Congressional session. My grandfather - Senator #19, Roy Noble from Vienna - is NOT the person that is hyperlinked to his name. How can this incorrect hyperlink be removed? 2600:1700:5850:7F30:4C96:8D5D:455B:846 (talk) 19:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Which article are you referring to, IP editor?--Quisqualis (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi person editing from ...455B:846. I have fixed the issue with this edit. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Automatic number of contributions

Hello, I need help with a userbox. There's a userbox named Template:User contrib, and I usually put my contributions manually, (eg: 505, then 567, then 613), and it's inconvienient. Is there something to put in there that makes the contribution number grow automatically? (sorry for the bad grammar) --a gd fan (talk) 19:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi a gd fan. I don't think this is currently available and would require someone writing a new module/program/magic word for the purpose, or that a bot be dedicated to regularly updating the template's number parameter on userpages containing this (and similar) templates. I don't have the technical background to explain why that is, but I base my post on the fact that none of the various templates that provide counts of aspects of user contributions have this feature, despite that providing such a feature would be such an obvious improvement to these types of templates, as well as on reading Template talk:User contrib#Automatic Updates (and the silence to the post at Template talk:User contrib#Why aren't the edit-counts filled automatically? (like it's done for the mobile userpages). Of course, posting a question like yours to a public help forum like this sometimes makes it happen (but I wouldn't hold my breath)<--see that? I'm daring someone to show their amazing programming skills, making it more likely to happen;-) Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:28, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: Well, I though MediaWiki had a built it command like {{PAGENAME}} and {{BASEPAGENAME}} for a user's contribution number, and if it did, it would be something like {{CONTRIBNUM|(user)}} a gd fan (talk) 20:36, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I looked at magic words before posting above, and it isn't there AFAICT.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Please take a look at this edit request

Hello, can somebody please take a look at this edit request on the talk page of Fardad Fateri. It is a small request. Direct link is available here - Talk:Fardad_Fateri (the last request on the page) GoMetroGo (talk) 21:02, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

GoMetroGo As noted in the request, "The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient. There are currently 111 requests waiting for review." Efforts to "jump the line" don't usually work. Please be patient. 331dot (talk) 21:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)