Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1125

Archive 1120

←

Archive 1123

Archive 1124

Archive 1125

Archive 1126

Archive 1127

→

Archive 1130

I have submitted an article for a member of legislative assembly

The article i presented was not accepted and i could not understand why! I have mentioned all the required data however the article was not accepted. Could you please help me ! Panwarankit7 (talk) 06:03, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Panwarankit7, I assume this is about Draft:Vijay Singh Panwar. The draft does not cite any sources (though it does list some). So the reader has no way of telling where the information in the draft comes from, and checking it. Any draft that fails to cite reliable published sources will be declined. Maproom (talk) 06:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Vijay_Singh_Panwar Hi @Panwarankit7, as mentioned by the reviewer your draft needs more reliable sources to prove the notability of the subject. Eevee01^(talk) 07:50, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Panwarankit7 I have also noticed that you have not cited your sources correctly. Read Help:Referencing for beginners for more info. Eevee01^(talk) 08:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Can I get games on Wikipedia article

games On Wikipedia 105.112.184.254 (talk) 08:40, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Which game do you want? "Whack-a-Troll"? "JarlaxleArtemis Simulator 2021 Edition"? "A Week in Hell: My Admin Request Story"? "Racial Holy War Against Those Fucking Hipster Liberal N----- K--- C---s"? —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 08:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia:Department of Fun#Wikitainment for fun things to do and read on Wikipedia (not just games). Minkai (talk to me) 12:19, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

How to check drafts?

How do I see my drafts? MrDude1881 (talk) 12:53, 22 September 2021 (UTC)MrDude1881

If you click on the "Contributions" link near the top right-hand corner of any page you will see your drafts, together with your other edits. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

inserting photos

I have tried adding photos, that I took myself, to my article, but every time Wikipedia will not allow it. There is always some message that says they don't know if it is a proper source and recommend I use my own photos...which is what I have been trying to do. How do I insert photos?  Escooter21 (talk) 17:14, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Escooter21, and welcome to the Teahouse. I can't find anywhere that you have tried to upload photos: how have you tried to do it? I suggest using the upload wizard: if you took the photos, you shouldn't have any difficulty doing so. When you have successfully uploaded them, then you can add them to articles. --ColinFine (talk) 17:38, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: whenever someone mentions that they failed to upload a photo, I have a look at the commons Abuse log, since most often the source of the problem is their Filter #153, better known by his description, Crosswiki upload filter. Escooter21 Assuming you hold the copyright of these images (which usally means that you took them yourself, not just downloaded from some website), please upload them using the Upload Wikzard over at our Media Reprository Project called Wikimedia Commons. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:48, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

First, work on getting your draft accepted. Photos do not contriburd to confirming notability. 157.157.65.34 (talk) 21:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Thanks, I did find out that I needed to upload them to Wiki Common first, I was trying to just insert them from my laptop directly into my article and it would not let me do that. Escooter21 (talk) 13:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

linking in edit summary

How do I link to WP articles in my edit summary? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 14:33, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@The Tips of Apmh See Help:Cheatsheet. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:42, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Same as in a Wikipedia page. Within double square brackets: [[Article name]]. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:42, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, it works now. The Tips of Apmh (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft on hold on the basis of lack of notability

Hello! Here I am trying to contribute with my first article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Youth_Progress_Index) As suggested by the person who reviewed my article, I would like to ask you for an opinion on the notability issue. Thanks to Nomadicghumakkad' tips, the article is already much better, but I am still struggling to reach notability in his opinion.

I based the draft on the Youth Progress Index(YPI)'s big brother Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Progress_Index). Basically, the YPI is a specification of this methodology. If compared, I think that the page we are drafting is even more thorough with a more detailed explanation of data sources. In my opinion, it seems solid since the explanation of data collection and analysis seems convincing and well-supported. Moreover, it has been endorsed by institutions and well-know research groups (the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA), the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), the Social Progress Imperative, and the International Organisation of Employers).

It is undeniable that there is a lack of tons of sources on the subject out there, but still, the draft seems legit to me. All the indicators are explained and the data have been collected using a great number of solid sources.

Could you have a look into it and help me understand how to make it better?

Thank you to this wonderful community. FBMR94 (talk) 13:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, FBMR94. The challenge for a reviewer is that your draft has 68 references and it is fairly obvious that many of your references are not independent of the topic. Notability comes from truly independent sources devoting significant coverage to the topic. So, I suggest that you identify the three best independent sources so that an uninvolved editor can easily gauge notability instead of having to wade through all 68. User:RoySmith/Three best sources is an essay that describes this concept. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Why was my wikipedia page deleted?

I wrote my first article and I don’t know exactly what I did wrong, but the page got deleted with this message:

A tag has been placed on Draft:Fixr.com, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic.

Could you please point out some specific errors which I need to improve? Thanks! OrneGuerrero (talk) 13:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Fixr.com was G11'ed by Materialscientist. I can't read deleted pages and therefore cannot say how bad it was, however, one of the admin folks around here will likely repsond with more details. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I am an administrator and could read the deleted draft. It failed to establish that Fixr.com is a notable topic. The very best of the sources, the Washington Post, the New York Times and U.S. News & World Report just mentioned the website in passing. Others were just entries on a list of similar websites, with a handful of sentences giving a quick overview. I was not able to find any reliable sources devoting significant coverage to Fixr.com itself, and a lot of the content was completely unreferenced. So, it appeared to the deleting administrator that your goal was to promote this website instead of to write a well referenced encyclopedia article about a notable topic. What is your relationship with Fixr.com? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse for Hindi language

Why isn't there a Teahouse in Hindi language ? Nishānt Omm (talk) 16:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Other language Wikipedias don't necessarily distinguish between help for new users and more general help. On hiwiki you can start with help at hi:विकिपीडिया:सहायता. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Anna Talia Oze page

Hello My name is Alex Bazaare, Iam working on a page for Anna Talia Oze a Ugandan Public figure in entertainment. I need help on how to edit the article and add pictures, can someone help me on this? Thanks. Alex Bazaare (talk) 16:09, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Anna Talia Oze   Maproom (talk) 16:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Alex Bazaare: Welcome to the Teahouse! At the top of your draft is now a gray box with links to instructions for creating footnotes within your draft. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:13, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Name in list

Can be a name be given multiple times in an alumni list?

I am creating an alumni list of a university. The list is divided in sections as usual. Now suppose a man abc is a scientist, he was a professor and faculty of xyz institute, also he was a Director of pqr institute. Which category (section) will he go to: scientist or academic or organisational head?

There are more instances like abc who is a businessman, also a professor of an institute also writer on Literature having books. Like the prev he can be taken in businessman, academic and also literature personalities.

So in these cases, will the name repeat in the three sections or will be taken only once and if taken only once what will be that section? AnkurWiki 06:34, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

The policy at WP:ALUMNI says It is acceptable to list someone in more than one field, provided that this is mentioned in a side note. Add something like: "(Also listed in sport)". In general, given that the people in such a list are likely to have their own article, I'd recommend using that article to confirm the main reason why that person is notable and just use that for a single entry in the list. Hence, if the list has a section for Nobel Prize winners, then the name should go there if appropriate and hardly needs also to go into the section covering the subject for which they won the Nobel. You can of course use Ctrl-F within your browser to find if a name already exists within a long list article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

date format on Ruth Posselt

dates in entire article are in dmy format, however person is american (mdy date format). is it advisable NOT to add mdy date template and change dates in article? i am asking for confirmation of gut feeling. — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 09:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I count two dmy and one mdy: whichever is chosen, it should be used consistently. Since (a) the subject is American and (b) the original creator Wrightjack initially used mdy, this seems more appropriate. I suggest you be Bold, make the changes and go on to Discuss if anyone Reverts. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.67.3 (talk) 15:58, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

interesting facts: article was created in 2008 with birth and marriage date in article and in footnotes with mdy date format!!! i will go ahead and amend incorrect date format. — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 17:27, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

protect a page as non-admin

Can I add protection to a page as a non-admin? If not can I request a page to be protected? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 17:36, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi The Tips of Apmh! Only administrators can apply protection to pages, but anyone can request protection at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. DanCherek (talk) 17:39, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Articles on some creature automatically notable?

Hello! So while looking through Special:Random I've come across many article about creatures that are basically only 1 sentence with only 1 reference. I tried deleting one of these before however I was told an article about a creature/animal cannot be deleted unless it's an obvious hoax. This seems a bit silly to me because some animal only have 1 reference that proves they aren't a hoax. Could someone explain this reasoning further to me? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 15:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability (natural sciences) is a failed proposal, but might present some useful thoughts on the subject (see also its Talk page).

My personal feeling is that any 'creature' ought to be notable, so if the article on it has only one reference, it's likely that others exist out there somewhere, and one should search for more of them rather than seek to delete the article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.67.3 (talk) 16:11, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Blaze The Wolf. I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes which describes longstanding consensus on the notability of broad topic areas. This is what it says about species: "All species that have a correct name (botany) or valid name (zoology) are inherently notable. Their names and at least a brief description must have been published in a reliable academic publication to be recognized as correct or valid. Because of this, they generally survive AfD."

Correct name and valid name are scientific terms. If you search Google Scholar for a species name, you will commonly find discussion in the academic literature that would allow you or another editor to expand these stubs. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:12, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Ah ok thank you! I've always been a little confused as to why they are able to stay because it seems like someone who just found a new animal could have it added to Wikipedia as long as it can't be proven as a hoax. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 17:44, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

An article named Sangeeta Chauhan that redirects to Sangeita Chauhan

There is an Article of Sangeeta Chauhan which redirects to Sangeita Chauhan. May i fill up the details of MLA of Naugawan Sadat (Assembly constituency) in Sangeeta Chauhan? Bihariboy Rahul (talk) 16:51, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bihariboy Rahul: Welcome to the Teahouse! Presuming that MLA Sangeeta Chauhan meets Wikipedia's criteria of notability and you have sufficient independent reliable sources to write an article, you can write the article at Sangeeta Chauhan. If you do so, I suggest adding an {{about}} template at the top of each article.

• On Sangeeta Chauhan, you could add {{about|the politician|the actress|Sangeita Chauhan}} which will generate:
  This page is about the politician. For the actress, see Sangeita Chauhan.
• On Sangeita Chauhan, you could add {{about|the actress|the politician|Sangeeta Chauhan}} which will generate:
  This page is about the actress. For the politician, see Sangeeta Chauhan.

Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:22, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

FTR, All MLAs are notable per WP:NPOL. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:52, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank You User:GoingBatty. I will do the same Bihariboy Rahul (talk) 17:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

highlight external links in body of articles

is there any script or settings or gadget to find external link: [https://ex.ec rt] in body of articles. User:Ashtamatrikas/sandbox contains link https://yanggongqian.com/ Gong Qian Yang — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 16:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Each external link is wrapped in a span tag with the specific class. So, you can use CSS to customize their appearance. Ruslik_Zero 17:07, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Ruslik0 xcellent suggestion. resolved by adding code .mw-body-content a:link.external { color: #3366BB; } /* external links */ given at Help:Link color on my custom css page. simple and can be tuned as i use it more. — ashtamatrikas (talk • contrib • actions) 18:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Editing without knowing coding

How to edit in Wikipedia without knowing coding? Nishānt Omm (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Nishānt Omm: You don't need to know coding to edit Wikipedia. (I'm certainly proof of that.) If you familiarize yourself with the material in Help:Cheatsheet, you should get along fine. If you need more detailed help, the links on that page will lead you to it. Deor (talk) 16:44, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Nishānt Omm: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can also use the Wikipedia:VisualEditor to edit articles by clicking the "Edit" tab (instead of the "Edit source" tab), so you don't have to see the source code. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

... but for those whose preferences are set up like mine, the "Edit" tab goes to the source editor and I don't have an "Edit source" tab. I don't use the Visual Editor. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:44, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Tracking Conversations in Article Talk Pages

Unlike front-facing article content, the talk pages of articles seem to have a more fast and loose formatting style, and it is proving a tricky eye strain to keep track of conversations I am having with other editors. Is there a tip and/or trick to keeping abreast of the discussions I am in without manually trawling through the whole talk page each time I refresh? - Personofcanada (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2021 (UTC) Personofcanada (talk) 19:45, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@Personofcanada: Unfortunately I'm fairly sure there's no where to keep track of what point you are at in the discussion after reloading the page, unless there's something I'm not aware of. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 19:47, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@Personofcanada: Welcome to the Teahouse! I go to the "View history" page and select all the diffs marked "updated since your last visit", and then click "Compare selected versions". Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:54, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

I had at least hoped someone had come up with a personal shorthand of some kind. All I can think of is opening a desktop sticky note, and then pasting my last contribution in each conversation into it for CTRL+Fing my way back to each thread. Thanks. O

On an unrelated note, how do I make my username highlighted in cool colours like that? Is it all this textual junk: "<b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q">" - </b>Personofcanada (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Ya pretty much. My signature was made by Levi_OP so if you want a cool signature like mine, I'm sure they'd be willing to help you out. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 20:10, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@Personofcanada: pinging ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 20:12, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

_{It looks like textual junk to a layperson, but it is well-structured HTML code.} Thefficacy (talk) 02:17, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@Personofcanada: Welcome to the Teahouse. You may be interested in installing the Convenient Discussions script, which can visually identify which comments have been added since your last visit and your own comments. It also allows you to "watch topics", which I believe shows new comments as bulleted items in the page's table of contents. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Personofcanada, @Blaze The Wolf, @GoingBatty, @Tenryuu You can subscribe to talk page sections as detailed at the top of Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:44, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: I've heard that you can do that however I've never seen the option that allows me to do that outside of a test of the function of that with the reply tool. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 18:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Earning from Wikipedia

Can anyone earn money by editing on Wikipedia ? Nishānt Omm (talk) 16:51, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

The vast majority of editors here are volunteers. There are also scammers that will take money but not deliver on promises. Some people edit Wikipedia on behalf of their employer, and must abide by WP:PAID rules. RudolfRed (talk) 16:54, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Unless I'm mistaken, technically you can be awarded money by other users by completing certain requested tasks. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 18:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Unsure which Infobox template to use

Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes § Unsure which Infobox template to use

 –  ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Creating an Article about Paul Buccieri

Hi, I saw a red link on the A&E Networks page which suggested that a page might be needed for the company’s president, Paul Buccieri. I submitted an article creation for him, but was told to gather more opinions. There’s information included in the draft giving an overview of his life and career. Everything is sourced from pretty major publications (Adweek, Hollywood Reporter, Variety, etc.) and written as neutrally as possible. Could anyone else weigh in? Thanks, Sabillbr (talk) 20:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Sabillbr (talk) your draft states that Buccieri is with A&E, but doesn't show why that's important. Do many people watch the network, so that it would be considered notable to be named president? Is he making improvements to the network? I see one of your references says he's responsible for a show called Live PD, which is apparently popular, but you make no mention of that in your draft. I would suggest you look for more such articles, showing that Buccieri is responsible for bringing popular and/or prestigious shows to A&E, or that the network's rating are improving, any accomplishments to show that he is a good president. Karenthewriter (talk) 23:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Help Me

 Yomamajoy (talk) 04:50, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello Yomamajoy, what do you need help with? Be specific. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 04:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Your draft User:Yomamajoy/sandbox/VA-AV Comedy has no potential to becoming an article because the person does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Give up. 157.157.65.34 (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Don't tell them to give up! Just because 1 thing doesn't have potential doesn't mean that they should just give up all together. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 16:09, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

I Just Want My Wikipedia Page To Publish

Declined three times and not going to be approved. The person the article is about started YouTubing in July. Has some followers, and no one is writing about him (hence no references). See WP:TOOSOON. 31.209.146.55 (talk) 23:53, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

edits to Andia Chaves Fonnegra, apparently by subject of page

A page that I have worked on (Andia Chaves Fonnegra) has, mostly uncited, new details being added by the subject of the page. I think this is the case because the edit summary says '...where I earned...'. The IP address also added an excessive number of publications and added an unremarkable grant as an 'award'. What should happen now? From other pages, it seems like this should either be changed back to the way the page was, and/or some of the content flagged as needing citations, and/or flagged as being edited by someone who should not be editing their own page. However, I do not think I should be the one making these changes. DaffodilOcean (talk) 11:50, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I've reverted the addition, as it's unreferenced and added excessive entries to the selected publications section. I've left a message on the IP's talk page with some advice about WP:COI editing, and how to approach it. Neiltonks (talk) 12:24, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Neiltonks: Thanks! --DaffodilOcean (talk) 23:58, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

What do I do when my submission is undone for appearing not constructive?

Hello, my most recent submission on "Situational Quadruple Nexus" was immediately considered to appear not constructive. Well, I thought it was a very useful piece. I would appreciate help please. I could improve it with some guidance. Ameh Abraham (talk) 00:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Ameh Abraham:, welcome to the Teahouse. Your edit was undone because it blanked an existing page to write an article on something else, and that's not allowed here-- hence the notice on your talk page. However, we're not opposed to new articles-- we encourage them. If you'd like to work on a new article, you have your own personal sandbox to develop it before submitting it to mainspace. You can access your sandbox by logging into your account and clicking the button labelled "sandbox" next to your talk page. Happy editing! Helen(💬📖) 01:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I know I'm not exactly a newbie, but I have one more question

Hello, Macadamia here. Quick question: In the 'edit count' part of the infobox for Wikipedia users, is there a way to use a template so I won't have to change it every time?

Thanks, Macadamia of the LeafWings | HEAR ME ROAR!! | Contribs | My Guestbook📖 01:12, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Macadamia of the LeafWings: Welcome to the Teahouse! Looks like the |edit_count= parameter in {{Infobox Wikipedia user}} has to be populated manually. In addition, it seems that all the userboxes at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Stats and tools/edit count require you to enter the number of edits. You could try using {{Service award progress}} if you like. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:18, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

how to edit page

how to edit a page please answer Person1662626271717 (talk) 03:27, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Person1662626271717: Welcome to the Teahouse! You might enjoy Help:Introduction and Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure, a training adventure game. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:40, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Question by Rapmusiclover123

can someone help me to move my draft to the real wikipedia?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rapmusiclover123 (talk • contribs)

@Rapmusiclover123: The flow on discussion pages like the Teahouse is that new topics are opened at the bottom of the page, I have accordingly moved it. With regards to your question, I assume this is about Draft:Kah' Linda. That draft would benefit from reliable sources, which is obligatory for articles about living people, because Wikipedia is not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident. Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:50, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, why do you think "Kah' Linda lives on music planet X." is good content for a WP:BLP? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: sorry, for not posting it to the bottom, thanks for moving it, the article is about living people, there is a production team behind Kah' Linda and the singer is also a real person, her alter ego is the comic superhero though, maybe I should not have put the information about the comic in the biography field— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rapmusiclover123 (talk • contribs) 11:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Take the time to read WP:MUSICBIO. If you don't have the sources demanded there, the article will not be accepted. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Rapmusiclover123: I took a look at the article, and it seems a bit WP:POV. You will have to fix it if you want even a chance of the article being accepted.Minkai (talk to me) 15:33, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Minkai, yes would love to get help how to make this article I have written acceptable Rapmusiclover123 (talk) 17:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Rapmusiclover123. Please read your first article, if you haven't already. One of the things that makes writing a new article so very very difficult for new editors is that they generally don't realise that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.. Writing an article without first finding several independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject is like building a house without building foundations, or even surveying the ground to see if it is stable enough to build on. My advice to you would be to put this project aside for a few months while you learn how Wikipedia works by making edits to some of our six million existing articles. If you do so, then when you come back to it you may have a better understanding of what is needed. --ColinFine (talk) 20:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

not sure does Distrokid count as a independent record label cause that is where Kah' Linda is signed to? One of the producers has an allmusic credit list and has been on the official american charts with the band HURT, so that should count as secondary sources? Rapmusiclover123 (talk) 05:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I have added some footnotes now as well Rapmusiclover123 (talk) 06:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Watchlist

How many pages can I have on my watchlist? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 23:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@The Tips of Apmh: As far as I'm aware the only limit is the number of pages on Wikipedia (which is over a million and if you have every page on wikipedia on your watchlist then your watchlist is functionally identical to Recent Changes. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 23:02, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. The Tips of Apmh (talk) 23:05, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Some users have reported interface problems with watchlists above 5000 to 10000 pages. I have no problems with 8000. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:39, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I regularly run 15,000 to 20,000. Graphical editing of my watchlist sometimes fails due to timeouts with very large watchlists. Meters (talk) 02:55, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

I currently have 26,640 with no problems...... reduce from 50,000 that had minor load problem when set to show 500 at a time.Moxy- 03:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

BTW the English Wikipedia has somewhere between 6 and 7 million articles, but more than 50 million pages. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:47, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Help removing flags

Hi, We are aiming to update the Dassault Systemes page in order to have this tag removed: This article relies too much on references to primary sources. (June 2016)

We've done the research to obtain 3rd party sources and proposed changes on the Talk page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dassault_Syst%C3%A8mes. We'd like to know if it's OK for me to make these changes or if an editor can assist.

Thank you. 3DS Patrick (talk) 15:16, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@3DS Patrick: You saying "we" makes me think that your account is a shared account, which is not allowed per Wikipedia's policies. Also, if you've proposed the changes then you will have to wait for another editor to make sure they are good to be added. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 15:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

The account states that it belongs to an Employee of Dassault Systèmes, breaching WP:COI and WP:POV _Signed,Pichemist ^(Talk) 16:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Disclosing the COI on the user page is required, and the username itself is ambiguous enough to not be promotional, I think. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 16:11, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Pichemist, that is a very combative way of interacting, and in particular the OP has properly requested changes on the talk page, so POV doesn't arise. Please AGF. 3DS Patrick, thank you for disclosing your status on your user page: WP:PAID recommends that you use the template {{paid}} to do this. Thank you for wanting to improve the article (Wikipedia would like all its articles to be properly referenced, though it does not have much interest in whether this will benefit the subject of the article or not), and also for proposing changes on the talk page rather than directly editing the article. In future, I suggest you use the {{edit request}} template on the talk page: that will put your request on a list of such requests, so that editors who look at that list will see it and you won't need to ask here. --ColinFine (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

I will also note that the requested edits are fairly innocuous: they do not touch the text, but instead change the sources (and in a good way, using newspaper articles instead of company press releases). An edit request would likely be accepted. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:21, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from Fashionpolice007

FYI

 – Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 17:41, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Upon review of the materials you provided, we are interested in understanding how we go about developing a company page so that it's in compliance with your terms of service. If this requires the paid editing declaration, can you advise on costs and template for getting that underway?

Referencing this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:LTK_(company) Fashionpolice007 (talk) 17:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Fashionpolice007: Welcome to the Teahouse! There is no cost to edit Wikipedia, and be wary of any companies that charge money to edit on your behalf. See WP:COIPAYDISCLOSE for information on how to declare your conflict of interest on your user page. Also see Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing and Help:Your first article. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, remember, "Oxfords, not Brogues" -Roxy the sceptical dog. wooF 17:47, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

@Fashionpolice007: Much more important than choice of shoes, the main thing to remember/understand is that there's no such thing as a "company page" on Wikipedia. There are encyclopedia articles about companies that are sufficiently notable and have sufficient independent sources writing about them that someone--again, independent--has undertaken to write such an article. The result might or might not be to the company's liking. Uporządnicki (talk) 11:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

UTC+14:30

I'm planning to create the unofficial time zone UTC+14:30 can you help me creating this article? M9034w (talk) 04:48, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Have you found reliable, published sources that discuss it in detail, M9034w? And if you have, what kind of help are you looking for? -- Hoary (talk) 05:51, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@M9034w: This would definitely not be accepted as an article because as you said, it's an unofficial time zone, meaning you just made it up. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 13:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Focusing on constructively editing to build on Wikipedia

Hello. I am a an long time IP editor that recently decided to make an a account. I focused on fighting vandalism for the most part, but I want to branch out and be able to help build on Wikipedia's content. However, I need a place to start as someone who is very unfamiliar with this. Thank you in advanced for your replies. CosmicJacuzzi (talk) 14:20, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@CosmicJacuzzi: Hello Cosmic a cosmic jacuzzi sounds very pleasant I'd be glad to assist you with figuring out how to help build Wikipedia! Just leave a message on my talk page! ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 14:37, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

How do create my page?

 WikiChowdhury (talk) 16:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@WikiChowdhury, Hello! If you mean that you want to create a WP:USERPAGE, click the red link "WikiChowdhury" in your signature, type something and publish. If you mean you want to create a WP-article, first make sure you have the sources demanded at WP:GNG. Then read WP:YFA. Trying to create a WP-article about yourself is generally a waste of time. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

"This is a glitch" "This is a bug"

Hello! So I noticed that sometimes when an IP edits they will be like, "This is a glitch, I shouldn't be able to edit this and yet somehow I can" which confuses me because I thought the majority of people know that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia anyone can edit. Anyone have an explanation? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 16:12, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Possibly a misunderstanding of the protection policies, and how the are not meant to be preventative? CosmicJacuzzi (talk) 17:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@CosmicJacuzzi: I don't think so, as from my knowledge most IPs aren't even aware of protection policies. HOwever for registered users that have made a few edits that might make sense. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 18:03, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, that's kind of my point. They know the page was protected, because they are unable to edit it. They don't understand why it's protected, and fall under the false presumption that all pages and articles on Wikipedia are protected. When they find an unprotected page, "I found a glitch. There's a page that can be edited by anyone that's not logged in". When in actuality, Wikipedia can be edited by anyone and page protections are not meant to be preventative. CosmicJacuzzi (talk) 18:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft rejecred several times

I made a draft and it got rejected several times even though I have edited it. I wanna know how to improve it so please give me some tips or edit it for me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Gulled_Simba Nature116 (talk) 00:28, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Nature116: Welcome to the Teahouse! Which of the 12 notability criteria at WP:MUSICBIO does Simba meet? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:07, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I was told he hasn’t gained significant coverage in third-party sources independent and does meet WP:NMUSIC, so i'll just have it deleted.Nature116 (talk) 18:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Search

I see the search button has been removed. How do we search for things now? (I could stick a nonsense string in the 'go' window and it will take me to the search page, but I assume there's a more straightforward way.) — kwami (talk) 10:05, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi kwami. What is your skin at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering? I see a "Search" button in all skins which have a "Go" button. Do you have a search button in safemode? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I have a similar problem, Monobook skin, Firefox 92. For me the search button shows up, but then disappears if I focus on the search text box. Happens also with safemode, and also in different language Wikipedias. MKFI (talk) 14:03, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

This is phab:T291272: "Search" button disappears when clicking search box in Monobook. It also happens for me with Firefox 92 in MonoBook. The same happens in the officially unsupported Modern and CologneBlue. Until it's fixed, you can start a search with a tilde ~ or click "Search for pages containing" below the dropdown search suggestions. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:47, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Monobook, responsive mode.

Huh. I see a search button on the 'Preferences' page, not just on the page in safe mode. It disappears if I click in the window, but it reappears if I refresh the page or leave and come back. The safe-mode page has the same behaviour. On the WP main page, as on regular articles and talk pages, the search button is just there for a fraction of a second, and then disappears even if I don't click in the window, and it reappears for just a fraction of a second if I hit 'refresh'.

Didn't know about (or didn't remember) the tilde. Thanks, that's handy. I don't see an option for "Search for pages containing" (no button or dropdown menu), but the tilde's enough. — kwami (talk) 18:52, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Integrate.com

 Roundnutz14 (talk) 19:19, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Roundnutz14: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Did you have a question about integrate.com that you wanted to ask? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 19:22, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

User Standing

Is there some kind of rating for user standing? Like if someone has broken a bunch of rules or is regularly rude does their score go down, and when they follow rules and are kind and helpful the score goes up? TipsyElephant (talk) 17:22, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I don't believe so. Huggle has a rating for individual edits, but not for entire user accounts. A quick view into the account's block log can give some hints, however. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:28, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: no realistic system could codify a user's standing in the community (and I wouldn't be comfortable knowing some tool, or worse—group of users, was "rating" me). In addition to their block log, you can look at a user's technical rights (mine as an example), whether they've ever run for RfA (Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Bilorv would exist if I ever had) and whether they are subject to any editing restrictions (whether placed by ArbCom or the community). You can look through the user's talk page history and search their name in archives of ANI/AN.

However, before doing this for a user, think about what you're doing and what the purpose of gathering such information is. In the case where you want to raise a person's misconduct for further attention, knowing something about whether they've done similar things in the past is useful. But obviously, you should not go around dragging up events from the past as personal attacks against a user ("well, I don't care about your opinion here because you're a problem user who has faced sanctions X and Y before"). — Bilorv (talk) 18:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: thanks! I was mostly wondering so I could check what my standing was if I had one. TipsyElephant (talk) 19:29, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: I form a personal view of a user's "standing" in my mind. You, for example, have been here a couple of years and have the extended-confirmed user right, and a clean block log, which rates you way higher in my mind than someone who is autoconfirmed and has caused messes (perhaps not intentionally) for others to clean up, but lower than someone who has been through an extensive community vote of trust, such as an administrator, bureaucrat, ArbCom member, and so on. Those are really rough and broad judgments though and don't have small increments, and the factors that go into it cannot be condensed down into a single rating. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

General question about how vandalism is managed

How is vandalism managed beyond measures such as ClueBot, watchlists, etc.? I understand that there also exist people who watch recent changes for disruptive edits but surely there must be such a massive volume of vandalism that will go unnoticed, especially small but bizarre examples, or on obscure pages. I understand that there is probably not a singular answer to this question, and never will be, but I am curious as to how experienced editors and users of Wikipedia go about this task of preventing vandalism in general. Tamptonato (talk) 17:21, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tamptonato. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit and all the links that you can find there. The combination of highly effective bots and human editors who watch frequently vandalized articles is effective if not perfect. You may also be interested in Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Subtle Vandalism Taskforce. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:36, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Tamptonato. You should probably read the article at WP:VANDAL and see whether that suggests more specific questions. Some editors get involved with the recent changes patrol which augments what the bots do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:37, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tamptonato: (edit conflict) it isn't actually that common that vandalism goes unnoticed, because there are several lines of defense.

1. The edit filter stops a bunch of obvivious vandlism from being saved in the first place. Example filters are Filter #3 (article blanking), #31 (ASCII art), or #255 ( vandalism in all caps). these aren't all filters, just a few examples.
2. the list of recent changes, which can be filtered for new users, for example (old user accounts are less likely to vandalise, apart when compromised)
3. ClueBot NG, which reverts edits automatically
4. A bunch of semi-automated tools can help with patrolling, such as Huggle or RedWarn. They usally filter good edits out before showing them to to the user (becuase that is not the purpose of that tools)
5. Users might add articles to their Watchlist, which might also help with reverting vandalism, particularely if the article is less common
6. Some high-potential topics will be protected relatively soon, particularely if they are subject to discretionary sanctions or general sanctions, even if the actual amount of vandalism is not as much

Also, fighting vandalism is relatively easy once you know how to do it, which generally causes editors to be faster at detecting vandalism. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

To give the flip side of this, Tamptonato, you say that surely there must be such a massive volume of vandalism that will go unnoticed. Maybe "massive" is an overstatement, but some vandalism goes unnoticed for far too long and doubtless some is never really noticed. In my regular browsing of Wikipedia to learn information, I often encounter suspect articles which feel like they've recently had a chunk of text removed or vandalised or false information added. In such cases, I check the page history for recent edits and restore the article to an older version if my intuition was correct. I encounter this maybe once per month without looking for it. — Bilorv (talk) 18:08, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

The above is definitely true. Sometimes I randomly encounter an article that has been vandalized, for example, recently I looked at the article Patriot Day and noticed an image caption that didn't make any sense no matter how many times I read it. I looked at the history of the article and I noticed that an IP had changed the caption to make no sense. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 18:11, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Genuine, overt vandalism is easy to spot, and will get zapped almost immediately, either by ClueBot or a human. There are some editors (me included) who find it quite relaxing to spend a few minutes reading the Recent Changes and checking out any suspect ones. The sort of error-making that's much harder to control is good-faith-but-not-quite-right editing: people who insert birth dates that are guestimates as though they were facts, or people who insert an extra, probably-true sentence between a referenced sentence and its reference, thereby adding a fact that looks as though it's referenced when it isn't, and gradually moving a referenced fact further and further from the documentation on which it was based. These things can easily escape the attention of the vandal-seekers. So basically, if you want to fight vandalism, just reading articles where you have the knowledge to spot a mistake is a good thing to do (if enough people do it, everything gets covered). Alternatively, just opening an article once in a while, and checking a few sources, is both educational and may reveal mistakes. But otherwise, just glancing through the Recent Changes helps. But I would add: don't fall into the trap of believing all edits by IP editors are automatically suspect. Some are, but other IP editors are extremely competent WP editors who've been here for ages, but prefer anonymity, while others are experts in a field whose edits and referencing will often be extremely accurate. Remember: sorting out vandalism is not a race where you're the best if you fix vandals fastest. No harm is done if someone else corrects an error while you're still checking that it is an error. Elemimele (talk) 20:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: For me, the most troublesome forms of vandalism are the least obvious ones, for example if somebody changes a single digit in a number, like 13 September to 14 September, and there is no way to know if it's vandalism or a correction without spending an effort in investigation that is disproportionate to the single character changed. There may well be a "massive" amount of that sort of thing that is missed and stays in articles for years. One thing that sort of helps is the account preferences setting "revision scoring" under the tab "Recent changes" that colors changes in your watchlist according to how disruptive an algorithm judges it. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:06, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I thought that option was only in RTRC @Anachronist: I agree. Sometimes vandalism can remain for years because it's just slightly altering 1 thing. I managed to find a mistake someone made while adding a reference that had not been fixed since the reference was added. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 20:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Help! Someone accused me vandalism for correcting my mother's biography page!

I found errors on my mother's page, which I corrected. Then this dude reversed them, and sent me this message, which I have no idea how to reply to: "Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Elzbieta Ettinger. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Pachu Kannan (talk) 16:00, 23 September 2021 (UTC)" Maiway2021 (talk) 16:14, 23 September 2021 (UTC) Maiway2021 (talk) 16:14, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Maiway2021: Hello Maiway! I understand your concern (and don't believe the editor was assuming good faith since they didn't welcome you before leaving a warning), however 1, it appears you have a WP:COI with the page in question and 2, your edits would've had to have reliable sources as we can't just take your information as factual because we need some way to prove that it is indeed factual. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 16:19, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Maiway2021. Wikipedia articles summarize what published reliable sources say about the topic. Unpublished personal memories of family members are not appropriate for Wikipedia biographies. The specific details of her death known only to family members are especially inappropriate. If you are aware of published reliable sources that provide better information, then please make an edit request at Talk: Elzbieta Ettinger. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:27, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi; I'm sorry that you've had a frustrating and possibly upsetting experience. I'm going to go slightly out on a limb here. Yes, everything written above is correct. Wikipedia's definition of "true" is "supported by reliable sources", so if a good newspaper says it's true, we treat it as true - even if someone pops up who knows better, from personal experience. But this is where I'm going to go out on a limb: Wikipedia editors generally do care passionately about the larger truth, and accuracy. We don't actually want an inaccurate encyclopaedia. Normally, if you didn't like something about an article where you have a strong conflict-of-interest, you'd be expected to state very explicitly on the Talk page exactly what wording you want to change, and with a good reference. This remains the best approach. But if you know something to be untrue in the article, I would advise you to say so on the talk page anyway, even if you can't at once find a good reference. There are some limitations on what you can do with a Talk page (no defamation of living people etc.) but basically a talk page is what it says on the tin: it's a place to discuss problems with the article. Inaccuracy is a problem. It might be that some editor will be motivated by your comment and will find a reference that supports it. Or alternatively, it may be that a few editors will agree that while your fact can't be inserted in the article (because there is no supporting reference) an existing fact on which you've cast doubt can be removed because it's not actually essential. Where you will struggle is in persuading anyone to remove a fact that is important, wrong, but supported by a good reference, and that's where you have my sympathy. Certainly, you can serve a very useful purpose on this article even though you have a conflict of interest. Whenever something interesting and useful is published that is relevant (for example, if someone writes a biographical article on your mother's life) you can bring it to others' attention at the talk-page, and suggest where the article can be improved in the light of the new source. This is super-useful as there simply aren't enough people to notice such things otherwise, and keep articles properly updated. Elemimele (talk) 20:20, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I added in information for a music group titled Jump 5 and all of that information was removed by an user named Walter Görlitz; how can I report this user for taking out credible information?

How do I report abuse of an user who takes out information from an Wikipedia article without any justable reason especially when the contact was sourced? Christopher2021 (talk) 20:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Christopher2021: The sources you used (twitter and youtube) are not in any way reliable. see WP:TWITTER.

• Hello Christopher2021 and welcome to the Teahouse! Walter is a very thorough editor and while we can all make mistakes they did leave an edit summary that explained why they removed the information. Reverted good faith edits by Christopher2021 (talk): All WP:PRIMARY sources. Find [{WP:SECONDARY]] to show that this is more than just passing interest.[1] was the explanation. The only mistake I see here is the { instead of the [ so it should read WP:SECONDARY. You must provide reliable sources that prove notability and also reference the information you are adding without the reader having to do much else but read. Walter followed policy by maintaining civility (WP:CIV) and assuming good faith (WP:AGF) while reverting your bold edits (WP:BRD). If you can find other sources besides Twitter and Youtube that relate the same information and are reliable then I recommend starting a discussion on the article talk page (Talk:Jump5). Hope this explains. Please ask more questions if you need to. Happy editing! --ARoseWolf 20:29, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Moving old user space draft

Asking for a friend: does anyone think it would be problematic to move a five-year old user space draft to draftspace? User's last edit was June 2016. --- Possibly ☎ 16:26, 23 September 2021 (UTC)  --- Possibly ☎ 16:26, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Possibly: Yes it is problematic. Drafts in draft space are subject to deletion after 6 months of no activity. That does not apply to user space drafts lacking the AFC template. RudolfRed (talk) 16:35, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

What about a copy-past move, with attribution, leaving the userspace draft in place? It's an interesting situation. --- Possibly ☎ 16:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Possibly what is the purpose of doing this? Why you want to move it is relevant to whether is could be done. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:35, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Dodger67: Someone asked me about this, and I am also curious about what the answer is to moving it. The purpose is to edit it and develop into a proper article. Gertrude Moakley is mentioned four times on wiki, three of which are currently redlinks. The user space draft is not going anywhere as it is, and it has been sitting idle for over five years. --- Possibly ☎ 19:50, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

The page on copying within Wikipedia seems to say that copying is fine, one just needs to give attribution. Correct? --- Possibly ☎ 20:16, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I've answered my own question by copying the new page from the userspace draft with proper attribution, per copying within Wikipedia. Thanks. --- Possibly ☎ 20:33, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Declined draft

Hi my post was declined because of lack of reliable sources. I included three sources...really the only sources that I could find on the Company and Product. These sources were from the Company's website. Ty. Tfalfano (talk) 14:04, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

So what is your question? If there are no reliable sources independent of the subject, there can be no article. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:13, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Our policy requires third party sources. This means that the company is probably not notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Ruslik_Zero 14:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Tfalfano, please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 14:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

this username is the same as the name of the person who actually registered the Apsco company. If this is your own company, creating a page about it yourself is likely a wp:coi as a note — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashoursmile (talk • contribs) 21:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Can someone help me please in writing an article about myself?

Hello everyone Can someone help me please in writing an article about myself? I have a published research on Cuckoo Search for Portfolio Optimization. I was on TV for on multiple channels. I have a notable invention in the field of education I'm ready to provide you with any reference or link Thank you MohammadElMedawar (talk) 11:16, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

See WP:COI for an explanation as to why you can't generally shouldn't write an article about yourself. In short - assuming you're actually notable - you have a massive conflict of interest, and as such cannot be relied upon to be neutral in your prose. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:27, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Chaheel Riens: To be pedantic (and as stated at WP:COISELF), one isn't forbidden from writing about themselves; they're just strongly discouraged. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:47, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

See also WP:Autobiography. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Excluding any reference to your publications, interviews of you, your invention, etc., as not confirming notability, can you identify at least three published articles about you? If yes, you can attempt an article about you. See WP:YFA for how to start. Teahouse hosts guide, but are not co-authors. 31.209.146.55 (talk) 17:58, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

MohammadElMedawar (talk) you may also want to read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Karenthewriter (talk) 21:54, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Resubmitting an article

How do you resubmit an article after making revisions to it in response to feedback? There is a publish changes button, but no resubmit button evident this time around.

What to do if the feedback says the references given in relation to the topics are not independent to the subject, when the references list contains clearly all independent, third party sources linked to websites?

This is the draft article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lucy_Bullivant

No money has been paid to anyone for its composition at any point, as suggested in another comment.

Thanks. Elementaryreality (talk) 17:36, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

You shouldn't have removed the box relating to Hoary's decline of the draft. That box had a re-submit button which would have allowed the new draft to go back into the group awaiting review. Similarly, the comments made were meant to be helpful and should not have been deleted. I'll leave it to Hoary to decide what to do now. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:42, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Either you or Hoary must restore the Declined notice and the Comments. For books and other publications, a list. Not a description ofthe contents. No quotes about how wonderful. Cut, cut, cut. P.S. You declare here not paid. Put that on your Talk page. Separately, is there a conflict-of-interest? 31.209.146.55 (talk) 18:19, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Michael. It's the first time I've done this and I wasn't aware that the box and the oomments were not to be deleted. I didn't have much time and assumed that once noted by me, the draft needed to be shaped further without them. How can I proceed, either to retrieve my deletions, or to notify Hoary that I respectfully request his restitution of the box and comments? Similarly I thank you for your comments about the publications.

Restord Decline31.209.146.55 (talk) 22:03, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Actually, Elementaryreality, there had been two decline notices; I've restored the earlier one as well. And there had also been two comments; I've restored these too. (Restoring material that rightly or wrongly was deleted earlier is simple: you just look in the history for an earlier version that has it, "edit" this earlier version, copy [to your clipboard] the material that you want to readd, not "publish" the result but instead return to the latest version, edit this, paste the old material, "publish".) ¶ Your disagreement with some of my comments was very reasonable and constructive, but as you put it on your talk page (without pinging me), I've only just noticed it. Better to put such comments in Draft talk:Lucy Bullivant, pinging the editor(s) in question (achieved merely by both (i) linking to their usernames, and (ii) signing, as I've linked to yours at the start of this comment, and signed at the end of it). ¶ Comments by others on Bullivant's books are fine (as long as they're from reviews and are not mere blurbs); but if you list her books then you can put the bibliographical information (ISBNs, etc) there. (Thus the descriptions of and comments on Morris Bishop's books are under "Writings"; whereas the bibliographical stuff is under "Books with major contributions by Bishop".) ¶ Your photograph of Bullivant makes me wonder how you could not be connected. -- Hoary (talk) 23:29, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Help with edit issue

Hi can anyone help me fix what this user did to this section of the page. I will give you the link to what he did and the link to the page. Reason why I am ask you is I can’t figure out what exactly he did. He made the Polling for the article invisible while in viewer mode. So when readers go to see the polling it shows up like their is no polling. Your help would be greatly appreciated

Link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1045859524?diffmode=source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_States_House_of_Representatives_election_in_Wyoming  BigRed606 (talk) 00:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@BigRed606: Welcome to the Teahouse. I've gone ahead and undid the revision, as it was most likely a nesting code issue that prevented the content from displaying. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:29, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much Tenryuu 🐲. BigRed606 (talk) 00:37, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Links and tables

Hi, Documents for links indicate that text with an alt parameter will be displayed when a File is not available from Commons. In Wikibooks:Oberon/ETH_Oberon/Mouse under heading "Select - Mouse Right key - MR" "File:OberonMouse4.png" is not available. Shouldn't the alt text be displayed?

At the bottom of the same page are two tables; aqua and yellow. How can the yellow table be located beside the aqua rather than below?

Thx, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 19:15, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi PeterEasthope. Please always link pages you refer to. Where does it indicate that alt text will be displayed if a file is missing? I don't think that is supposed to happen. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:29, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Opening Help:Wikitext#Images will give a table of examples. Scroll down to the third row which has alt=Puzzle globe logo. Is alt only for a browser failure? If the browser can't retrieve the image from the server, is the alt text not displayed?

Any ideas about my 2nd question? Can tables be displayed side by side rather than one below the other?
Thx, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 00:49, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@PeterEasthope: "when the image is unavailable" refers to cases where the image file does exist at the local wiki or Commons but isn't loaded or displayed to the user for some reason. alt text is a HTML feature. The user's browser decides what happens if alt text is sent. For example, a screen reader will probably read out the alt text whether or not an image can be retrieved. A normal browser will probably only display the alt text if it cannot retrieve the image due to a connection problem, or a browser setting to not load images. If a file by that name doesn't exist when MediaWiki generates the page then no image code or alt text is sent to the user, only a red link. If the file does exist then the alt text is always sent together with image code to tell the browser where to load the image. See Help:Table#Side by side tables. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:19, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Peartree

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Peartrea

Can you help me with creating this? Pozzalikesmypiza (talk) 01:07, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Do you have an array of reliable, independent, published sources, Pozzalikesmypiza? -- Hoary (talk) 01:14, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

See also the answer to the question at the help desk: Wikipedia:Help_desk#Draft:Peartrea RudolfRed (talk) 01:52, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Could I have get more detail about why the new page I created was deleted?

Yesterday, I created a page called The Tech News Source and am wondering what I need to change for it to be approved. Jammer2001 (talk) 22:51, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jammer2001. This seems to be about Draft:The Tech News Source, which lacks references to independent reliable sources. Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) is the relevant guideline that you must meet. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

@Jammer2001: Welcome to the Teahouse! Your page was not deleted - it was declined. Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. I suggest following the guidance on Help:Your first article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

question

how to edit page

ok Person1662626271717 (talk) 02:40, 24 September 2021 (UTC) Person1662626271717 (talk) 02:40, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Person1662626271717, you have already asked the same question and received a good answer there. -- Hoary (talk) 02:50, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Changing the subject matter

I used Visual Editing mode to create a biography of a North Carolina (US) guitarist named Sam Moss. The title reads "Draft:Sam Moss" How can I change it to just "Sam Moss"? I don't see a "Move" button on the page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sam_Moss?action=edit ModRecker (talk) 23:33, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

You can't. You have to get someone to review the article first. Minkai (talk to me)_{(see where I screwed up)} 23:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@ModRecker: Welcome to the Teahouse. The move feature is available for users that are autoconfirmed (when the account has made at least 10 edits and is at least 4 days old). Since it's a draft, if you think it's ready for review, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page (source editor might be an easier interface to do that), and it'll be put in the draft review backlog. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:24, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

ModRecker, Draft:Sam Moss ends with three references. Which parts of this substantial draft are based on which of the three? You can use "<ref>....</ref>" to indicate each. -- Hoary (talk) 01:09, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

ModRecker, your largely unreferenced draft cannot be accepted in its current form because it fails to make the case that Moss meets the notability guideline for musicians, which you can find at WP:MUSICBIO. There is at least one unreferenced quotation in the draft, which is contrary to policy. Much of the content appears to be Original research based on personal knowledge and personal relationships, and original research is not permitted on Wikipedia. This also raises concerns about Conflict of interest. What is your relationship with Sam Moss, and how do you know so much about his personal life? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:43, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

ModRecker, I warmly agree with Cullen328. I didn't even skimread Draft:Sam Moss. Now that I do skimread it, I see that its (incongruously chatty) content is unlikely to be sourced anywhere, except perhaps to interviews with the subject (but such interviews are unusable for most purposes). -- Hoary (talk) 03:00, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Problem with editing Lebanese Americans

Hello I am having issues editing the page Lebanese Americans. There is a typo in one of the references. When I have tried to fix it my edits won't be saved, because another reference is apparently blacklisted. I checked the blacklisted reference and while the source isn't great, there does not seem to be any overt problem with it. At present this reference (which was apparently added before the link was blacklisted) results in any edits I try to make to the page being blocked. Is there any way to fix this other than removing the said source involved? Inter&anthro (talk) 02:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Inter&anthro. I have changed the blacklisted url to a copy at another site. Blacklisted url's must be removed from the page, removed from MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist, or added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. If you only edit other paragraphs then it may be possible to save a page with an existing blacklisted url, but it's better to sort it out permanently. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:00, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

About wikidata after the merge is complete

What should I do with the wikidata after the merge is complete? See wikidata:Q7308961.--SilverMatsu (talk) 06:29, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@SilverMatsu: You can request the wikidata items be merged. See Wikidata:Project_chat#Merge for a recent request that's been fulfilled. You want to merge with wikidata:Q11235244, I think. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:26, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Thank you your reply. I'll try it.--SilverMatsu (talk) 22:36, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

There was a reply on wikidata; The sitelinks to the Portuguese Wikipedia, and , are also blocking a merge. --SilverMatsu (talk) 04:15, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

New Member in Teahouse

Hello Everyone, Thanks for inviting me here. as I am new here, I know I have a lot to learn and hope you all will be there to help me out.

adding this as a question because was not aware of how to introduce me here..

Happy editing and wish me luck and keep supporting whenever need ;) :) Marathi.Wiki.Editor (talk) 05:52, 24 September 2021 (UTC) Hi I am Taknk new memeber thanks for inviting

Adding pictures to the Twyford Motor Car Company article

I would like to add some pictures to the article. The pictures come from the Jefferson County History Center archives. Is this permitted, and if so, what steps do I need to do so? The pictures were taken in 2005. KristonScott (talk) 23:22, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Almost certainly not. The most important thing to understand: copyright is complicated. Photos taken in 2005 are still under copyright (with some specific exceptions, all photographs taken in the US are copyright of the photographer), and so you would have to get permission from the photographer to put the images on our sibling project, Wikimedia Commons under a Wikipedia-compatible license - and we require a very, very broad release of rights (and therefore we would need proof that the photographer said it was okay). Unless these are photos of historic events, or of buildings that no longer exist or people who have since died, in which case there's a solid argument that we can use them without getting permission as long as certain very stringent requirements are followed . Tell me more about the photos? DS (talk) 00:01, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@KristonScott: Welcome to the Teahouse! Whomever owns the copyright to the photos could follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 02:04, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I have two photographs, which show the Twyford replica being moved into Jefferson County History Center museum. I would consider this an historic event. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KristonScott (talk • contribs) 13:25, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

KristonScott, I think that it is a real stretch to argue that moving a replica of an antique car into a museum is an historic event. Do reliable sources widely describe it that way? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:59, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I believe the photographs were originally taken by a reporter for the Jeffersonian Democrat. Would the current editor of the newspaper be the copyright holder? If so, would his permission be enough and how would he give you the permission? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KristonScott (talk • contribs)

KristonScott, it would be very unusual for the editor of a newspaper to be the copyright holder of photos taken by a reporter/photographer. Almost all the time, copyright is held by the actual photographer. In some cases, the photographer may sign a "work for hire" agreement with the publisher, and assign copyright to that publisher. There needs to be a formal written legal document signed by both parties for such an agreement to be valid. So, unless you have strong evidence to the contrary, the copyright holder is assumed to be the photographer, or their estate if they have died. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the formalities. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:22, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Becoming a Host here at the Teahouse

I'm considering becoming a host here at the Teahouse, but when I enter my name in the "Make me a host" field it brings me to a page with a bunch of stuff I need to fill out. I don't quite understand half of the parameters. Is it like an application or is it like a profile? Also, are there any requirements that I should know about? TipsyElephant (talk) 17:28, 23 September 2021 (UTC

You do not need to be a host in order to answer questions here. Ruslik_Zero 17:52, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: The above is true otherwise I wouldn't be answering your question! However one of the requirements is to have a general understanding of WIkipedia's policies and be a semi-experienced editor so you can answer most questions on the Teahouse. If you wnat to see the issues that can arise from not being very experienced and becoming a Host, simply just take a look at my talk page archive. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 18:06, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I have made 7817 edits to the Teahouse so can claim quite a bit of experience here. I do not care at all about whether or not an editor is an "official" Teahouse host. All I care about are accurate, friendly answers that show that the editor has a good understanding of the question, and has something of value to add to the conversation. The thing that bothers me most is when eager new Teahouse participants try to answer questions and get the answer wrong. Don't do that. If you don't know, just keep your mouth (or keyboard) quiet. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:39, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Help with Australian copyright law

Hi, I recently created an article about the 1971 Qantas bomb hoax and someone has requested for images or infoboxes to be included. I found some police photographs of the criminals who committed the hoax; however because they were taken in Australia, I'm not sure if they're in the public domain, like they would be if they were taken in America. I'm just wondering if someone could help me with this, or direct me to someplace that could. Thank you. Huey117 (talk) 11:29, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Huey117: questions about the copyright status of images are best directed to WP:MCQ, where the copyrigh experts hang out. Mjroots (talk) 11:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll check it out now. Huey117 (talk) 11:34, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Banning

Hi, I'm H0MARUP and I want to ask something. If you use a single account, but you constantly deleting and messing with Vietnamese Wikipedia for example, and you got banned. Will you be banned on English Wikipedia too? H0MARUP (talk) 13:10, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

H0MARUP Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A block on one language version of Wikipedia does not carry over to other language versions(if it did, you would have been unable to make this post). There are rare cases of global blocks that apply to all Wikimedia projects, but those are only for abuse on multiple projects. 331dot (talk) 13:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@H0MARUP: From my knowledge, not necessarily. However if you do the same stuff on English Wikipedia then you will be blocked (not banned although they are similar). ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Edit on mathematical article considered disruptive

A correction on the Krylov Subspace page is considered as disruptive while it corrects a mathematical error (r\geq r_0 instead of r<r_0 in the second property). This seems to be an automatic rejection of the edit as the edit message explains the reason for the edit. How to proceed? 134.157.247.243 (talk) 12:53, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

• It seems the edit to Krylov subspace has been reverted by Pachu Kannan as "vandalism" and later by MoonlightVector as "non-constructive". Those editors did use an automatic tool (RedWarn), but they are still responsible for what they do with it.

I am in no position to judge whether the suggested edit is correct or not, but it certainly is not vandalism; also, the second revert came after this edit summary so it should have been more explicit about why the edit is non-constructive. I suggest you open a discussion on the talk page (Talk:Krylov subspace); if nobody answers in a reasonable time you can reinstate your version, if you can come to an agreement all is good, and if you cannot agree follow the next recommended steps on the dispute resolution process. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:30, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hockey/NHL players accolades section

I dont know where else to post this, but I think the accolades section for hockey players should be more like the other "big four" of North American sports pages. NBA players have a conveniently located accolades list right under their picture with all of their other information, labeled "Career highlights and awards". NFL and MLB players also have it. It makes the pages look a lot nicer to look at. Just a suggestion, let me know if this should be posted somewhere else. Thanks 2607:FEA8:98E2:6E00:B015:EC9C:3879:1BA0 (talk) 07:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Presuming that you're referring to {{Infobox ice hockey player}}, you could post your suggestion at Template talk:Infobox ice hockey player. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:56, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to create a "Category: Female Assassin Film". Anyone interested in teaching me how to do it?

There are Kate (film), Gunpowder Milkshake, The Protégé alone in 2021. In earlier years, we have had Anna (2019 feature film), La Femme Nikita (film), The Rhythm Section, Red Sparrow, etc. See more at https://thecinemaholic.com/female-assassin-movies/ or https://screenrant.com/ava-greatest-deadliest-female-film-assassins/. Thanks. Supermann (talk) 04:50, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Supermann. You can teach yourself by reading and studying Wikipedia:Categorization and the links you will find there. Feel free to ask more specific follow-up questions here at the Teahouse. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:59, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Supermann: Welcome to the Teahouse! In case you're not already aware, Wikipedia already has Category:Girls with guns films and Category:Films about assassinations. Any new category may be related to these. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:08, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Then I don't really need to create it. I would however propose "Girls with Guns" be renamed, because obviously they don't just use guns. Knives or any objects can become a deadly weapon in their hands. Category:Films about assassinations hasn't been added consistently to all the films out there, for example, it's not on Red Sparrow. Supermann (talk) 05:30, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

References

"Girls with guns" is an established anime genre, and the name was likely popularized from that, to the point where now it's a catch-all expression for fiction about attractive female characters who engage in violence with weapons. Classic examples would be the Dirty Pair action-comedy series and Bubblegum Crisis (sci-fi action in which the plot doesn't seem to be the point). ~Anachronist (talk) 05:41, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Supermann, if you think that an article like Red Sparrow needs a category, then the solution is simple: Add the category to the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:43, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. At the end of the day, if the plot doesn't have anything to do with assassination or assassin, I think Girls with Guns is not the best category to describe certain films. There are films that were not originated from anime, as much as I love the genre. Watching [[Dragon Quest: The Adventure of Dai#Second series (2020)]] btw. I think someone should provide a more nuanced description or precise category. Supermann (talk) 15:03, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Publishing Edits

Hi all! I just made a number of edits on a public page. I have submitted them but haven't seen the page "live." How long does it typically take for edits to be reviewed and then an article to be public? Also, it seems that an old version of the page is still below all of the edits that I made. Is that normal? Do I have to delete that as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kashubapress (talk • contribs) 14:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kashubapress, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is helpful if you specify the article or page you're talking about: I presume that it is Draft:Kevin Nicholson (businessman), as that seems to be the only article or draft you have edited. Looking at the history of that draft, it appears to me that though another editor has edited since you did, your changes are still there. Where are you seeing them not there? Note that, as a draft, this page is visible to anybody who knows where to find it, but will not be published as part of the encyclopaedia until somebody resubmits it for review (and it gets accepted - I haven't looked to see whether your edits address the reasons why it was declined before). Also, please sign your edits at talk or discussion pages like this one --ColinFine (talk) 15:08, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Kashubapress: Welcome to the Teahouse! The page won't be "live" as an article until someone clicks the "Resubmit" button and it is accepted. There should only be one version of the article in the draft, so you can delete the old version or merge the versions. Also see Help:Section and remove the external links from the draft. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:15, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

The previous editor had formatted the draft correctly with section headings. You ought to remove your new text and edit the existing sections. You may find it useful to read the WP:Manual of Style, and learn to edit existing articles before you try producing a draft of a new article. Don't try resubmitting the draft until you have sorted out the problems. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:19, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. This is helpful. The page that I am looking to edit is the Kevin Nicholson businessman page. I am not new to content writing, but I am new to contributing on wikipedia. I appreciate the guidance here!

Help With Biography

Hello! I would like to publish the autobiography that is in my sandbox. Wikipedia does seem challenging and I would love to learn from an expert. Thank you so much! G33kGirl (talk) 13:53, 24 September 2021 (UTC) G33kGirl (talk) 13:53, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

G33kGirl Hello and welcome to the Teahouse You say autobiography, but you are writing about a man while your username has girl it. Please clarify. I can say that you need more than one source; a Wikipedia article summarizes what multiple independent reliable sources state about a person. Most of your text is unsourced. Please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 13:57, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@G33kGirl: (courtesy link: User:G33kGirl/sandbox) I've tagged the sandbox for speedy deletion, as it looks more like a campaign ad for Mr. Sini than a proper encyclopedia article and would require a complete rewrite to be acceptable regardless of the sourcing. I'd say there's a good chance that he's notable enough to merit an article here, but I recommend first reading Help:Your first article and starting over. Hope this helps, and please feel free to ask further questions here. --Finngall ^talk 16:04, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Submitting drafts

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding User:ZX2006XZ (me) repeatedly resubmitting drafts without any improvement. Is there any way I improve on editing drafts in the future so I won't find myself in this predicament again? Thanks in advance. ZX2006XZ (talk) 15:33, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Simple. Don't resubmit until the problems have been solved. In each case you were told that the subject is not likely to be notable until after the film has been released. At that stage you can wait for significant coverage in published reliable sources independent of the subject. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:43, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Without getting too involved in the dispute, which I read over, I can tell you that you'll do well to try to discuss article edits and draft edits with other users thoroughly on the Talk Page. It sounds like other editors frustrations are coming from you not being communicative and showing that you're listening to objections. Getting on the same page with other editors is an important part of Wikipedia, and everyone wants to feel heard and not ignored. Does that make sense? Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 15:47, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

User:ZX2006XZ - You asked me on my talk page, 'What do you mean by not understanding how to use the talk page?' That was the only time that I have ever seen you use a talk page. Use talk pages, both article talk pages and user talk pages. It appears that you do know how to use talk pages; so use them. If your drafts are declined or your edits are reverted, ask on a talk page why, rather than just resubmitting or edit-warring. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I thought that maybe you didn't know about talk pages. I see that you do. So use them. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletion policy / cross wiki abuse

Hi, I'm a french contributor.

There are (probably) long-term abuses on Mahmoud Refaat on several Wikipedias. A French IP check (here, likely positive to duck test.) lead to french deletion. Some sources were invented.

Can you please check this page? It seems to belong to A11 speedy deletion criteria but I'm not sure.

Thank's, LD (talk) 00:07, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@LD: We'll take a look. It seems OK on the surface, but there are foreign language sources I can't read. The list of his publications is probably also excessive. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: thank's. It seems "OK" on the surface, but some sources (especially some ISBN) were created. IP check and contributor behaviors show there's potentially WP:COI + advertising promotion, which must be announced according to Terms of Use anyway ^^. At least, it doesn't met French standards (firstly deleted on Mahmoud Refaat, created again under Mahmoud Rifaat) and German standards (deleted page). --LD (talk) 00:43, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

See also: Special:CentralAuth/Behrouz.lawyer, cross-wiki WP:MEAT. --LD (talk) 01:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: - Google translate does a pretty good job on most major languages. Mjroots (talk) 07:50, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@LD: Article has been speedily deleted. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:48, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: thank's for the feedback. I have created a page which lists contributors and pages concerned by those puppets. Please feel free to contact me (here or WP-fr), read fr:Wikipédia:Faux-nez/Journalistdavidoff for futher details and check those Wikidata's Q : Q37988192, Q65198048. Most of wikis are unlinking and deleting those elements as well. --LD (talk) 18:56, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Archiving at Requests for permissions

hello 👋 i have a question how Archiving at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions works? is the process done by a Bot? or manually? Thank you —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 18:49, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sakura emad: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. All of the archiving is done automatically by MusikBot, the automated program. If you'd like to see the archives, here's the link. Happy editing! Helen(💬📖) 19:20, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Dear @Helen where can i ask further about how the bot is working? —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 19:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

You can ask at the bot operator's talk page: User_talk:MusikAnimal RudolfRed (talk) 19:38, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sakura emad: The administrator MusikAnimal operates the bot. He can probably answer your question(s) if you message him. Helen(💬📖) 19:41, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

 i will thank you very much —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 19:52, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

old wikipedia posts on internet

I noticed there is no wikipedia page for Callum Fairweather (Scottish actor). Having met him at a film festival recently and he was kind enough to let me interviewing him for a Scottish arts website. i went to look him up on wikipedia and can find lots of pages on imdb.com etc but not on wikipedia. it seems there is an old wiki page with his filmography but it is not accurate. There are things on there he has not been in according to imdb. I also noticed he is not on notable people in his hometown of Arbroath (he was born in dundee but lives in arboath) which considering how big he is in Scotland seems strange.

Im new here and dont want to create a page not knowing fully what to do but i would like to suggest someone create one about him. plenty details on imdb.com & i-on magazine etc.

many thanks

, ScottishArtists123 (talk) 09:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletion discussion was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Callum Fairweather. Notability criteria are at WP:NACTOR. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:40, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@ScottishArtists123 and David Biddulph: The deletion discussion was in 2015. It may be the case that NACTOR is now met. For info - IMDB is not regarded as a reliable source, so should be avoided wherever possible. ScottishArtists123, can you show that NACTOR is met? If so, one possible way forward is to have the deletion of the article reversed (there is a process for this that requires consensus to achieve) and then move it to draftspace to be brought up to scratch before it is moved back to mainspace. Mjroots (talk) 10:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Whoever changed/created the page will easily find articles on internet.... imdb.com, i-on magazine, idolbirthdays, boat of garten events, numerous other articles etc...these must be reliable sources.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottishArtists123 (talk • contribs)

Hello, ScottishArtists123, and welcome to the Teahouse. "Notable" in Wikipedia is used in a special way - it doesn't mean any of "famous", "popular", "important", "influential", or "successful", though it is often correlated with those. What it mostly comes down to is that there is enough independent reliable material published about the subject to form the basis of an article. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 10:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm afraid that those sources do not appear to be reliable click the blue link for more detail. Theroadislong (talk) 10:37, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

thanks for the feedback everyone....Surely newspapers and events listings are reliable sources?...Also according to imdb its info needs to be edited by their own administrators?— Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottishArtists123 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia doesn't consider to IMDB to be a reliable source, see WP:IMDB, as it is user-genrated. Wether an individual entry was written by their admins or somebody else is a distinction without a difference. And no, you do not need to be an admin at IMDB to edit there - logging in with facebook, google etc or creating a account does suffice. Not all newspapers are a reliable source either - the Daily Mail is considered deprecated (and unreliable) (more about that here. See WP:RSP for a list of frequently discussed sources. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Well then might i suggest someone permenently delete his old page as it is just a list/filmography and it seems to be inacurete but still shows up under deleted articles if you google his name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottishArtists123 (talk • contribs) 11:13, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@ScottishArtists123: I don't see any Google search results when I search "Callum Fairweather" site:wikipedia.org What is the exact search term you're using in Google, and what is the URL of the Wikipedia page you're seeing in the search results? Thanks! (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 15:02, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@ScottishArtists123: Addtionally, there are many mirrors of Wikipedia including Deletionpedia which has copies of deleted articles. Wikipedia has no control over these, since text on Wikipedia may be reused for any purpose. RudolfRed (talk) 15:30, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: ah right thanks, sounds like that's what it is then. i have had an attempt at writing my first article about him to see how it looks. it would be appreciated if you had a look at it? its not big. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottishArtists123 (talk • contribs)

See Help:referencing for beginners 157.157.52.49 (talk) 21:10, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hartford

Why is Hartford Going Or Drop To Division 3 Why. Grenert1 (talk) 21:03, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Are you trying to add context to that fact in the Hartford Hawks article? If so, I recommend you read the source used in that article. If this question is not related to Wikipedia, then this is not the right place to be asking it. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 21:22, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Grenert1, your recent edits suggest that you want Wikipedia articles to describe the state of affairs that you hope for. But they instead have to reflect the world as it is (as evidenced by reliable, independent, published sources). If you disagree with this, you're at the wrong website. -- Hoary (talk) 22:27, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Watchlist help page needs update?

In the Help:Watchlist section "Controlling which pages are watched" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Watchlist#Controlling_which_pages_are_watched) it says:

1. Tab at top of page: When viewing a page, click the star symbol ☆ between the 'View history' tab and the search box at the very top of the page...

The top of pages doesn't look like that for me. Is the description outdated? Robledoux (talk) 22:43, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

The screenshots are from the desktop view. If you are using the mobile view it will look somewhat different. There is still a "Watch" button at the top of the page, or at the foot of the page you can switch from mobile view to desktop view. - David Biddulph (talk) 23:55, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Not Sure How To Deal With Possible Vandal

Hello, I spotted some edits by Norewritingofhistory (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) that seemed unconstructive. I reverted the edits and left a message on the user's talk page regarding the issue. The user's contributions show a lot of unnecessary deletions and aggressive comments, primarily on pages relating to Vietnam. In many instances, the user aggressively accuses fellow editors of being biased and replaces information without providing new reliable sources. The user is relatively new and has been investigated for sockpuppetry before but the results were inconclusive. I am unsure of how to proceed with vandalism reviews or how to get an administrator to review Norewritingofhistory's contributions. Any suggestions or tips would help, thanks! Valorant (talk) 04:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Valorant: - I've had a look and left them a warning. In my experience, this is highly likely to end up in a block. Mjroots (talk) 07:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Valorant:That isn't true. I mainly revert unsourced and unreliable info. Stop spreading disinfo. I also see you added in additional information in Sino-Vietnamese War. I will verify whether that is true or not, as the person who initially added that in did not mention what you edited in. Norewritingofhistory (talk) 22:34, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Norewritingofhistory: - You claim to only revert unreliable information, yet you have deleted entire sections that you deemed "irrelevant". Your negative attitude, aggressive comments and the now-deleted statement on your user page all suggest you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you intend on being a productive editor, I suggest reviewing Wikipedia editing etiquette and rules and stop assuming bad faith. --Valorant (talk) 23:59, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Valorant:Entire sections is a stretch and magnitizing the issue. Those "entire sections" had unsourced and unreliable sources from random websites. I could create a website and write anything I want on it for $12.00/year. Am I allowed to use this as a reliable source for Wikipedia? It's like me using Youtube videos and creating a domain with 123realfactstruth.com as substitute for Cambridge and the likes. And I deleted it so we could talk here with everyone else watching our discussion. And yes, I have reflected and know what to do.Norewritingofhistory (talk) 00:41, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

DoubleCheck

What is the etiquette for WikiLoop DoubleCheck? Is there any way to report vandalism to admins for clear jokes or make changes within the software when you see small grammar stuff? Reasonable Doubt24 (talk) 01:54, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Corpse Husband

For some reason, when I try to add the link to Hot Demon B!tches Near U!!! in the Corpse Husband discography table, it completely corrupts the page and I have no idea how to fix it, even when I erase the cell and start from scratch. TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 01:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Trevortnidesserped: That's due to the triple exclamation marks (!!, to be more specificaly) in the name of the article, which the wikimarkup sees as a column break. I tested and using its html unicode (!) to replace the second exclamation mark at the end worked fine. Isabelle ^🔔 02:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Shortcut

Hello. How can I create a shortcut (like WP:GNG for example) to a guideline? Can I just "do it" without prior "authorization"? Paul Vaurie (talk) 04:54, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie: You can create a redirect, but the question should be "should you?" I'd go to the guideline page you want to do the redirect for and start a discussion on the talk page. The redirect may have been proposed or discussed already, and rejected. It would have to be a common and intuitive redirect term that no one else thought of yet, but that others are using thinking it's the correct one. A tough reach. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 05:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

It's a very minor, particular page on a WikiProject that has gotten four (!!) views in the past 30 days, so I doubt there would be much controversy or even any contributions in the talk page. I would like to redirect WP:STADIUMSN to Wikipedia:WikiProject Event Venues/Sports task force/Notability. What do you think? Paul Vaurie (talk) 05:08, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

WP:SPORTSVENUES could also be a redirect. I just want at least one redirect to this page, because I find its content useful in AfDs. Paul Vaurie (talk) 05:12, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie: How about WP:NVENUE? It's unused and short, and follows the convention for notability redirects. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 07:40, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I was recently requested (at Wikipedia:AFCRC) WP:COPPA → Wikipedia:Child protection. ― Qwerfjkltalk 06:50, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page

Hey there, I'm still rather new - besides adding references. I was wondering, are there any tools in specific that can be applied to add a full reference every time you put something in between <ref> and </ref>? I apologize if this is phrased badly. Apollo468 (talk) 00:30, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I've adjusted your markup, Apollo468, so that it reflects what I think you intended to write. I hope that my guesswork was correct. -- Hoary (talk) 01:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

If you want multiple citations of the same reference, then for any one instance (though preferably the first), you write <ref name="xyz">Author(s), title, website title, URL, date, date accessed, any other important stuff</ref>, in which "xyz" is any distinctive string starting with a letter; and for each of the other instances you just write <ref name="xyz" />. For multiple references to the same book or similar, though with differing page numbers, you do the same but immediately after each instance you also use Template:Rp. (Does this help?) -- Hoary (talk) 01:21, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry if I get this wrong (I don't do much besides adding references) but is do you have to add the author, title, website title, etc. for every reference manually or is there a template? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apollo468 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Apollo468: Yes, there are several reference templates such {{cite web}}. I suggest reviewing Help:Referencing for beginners. Hope this helps, and happy editing! (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) GoingBatty (talk) 02:37, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

If you're using the source editor rather than a visual editor, you'll have two rows at the top of the edit window. If you select "Cite" at the extreme right hand end of the top row (it is probably already selected), then the item on the extreme left of the row below, "Templates" offers you a range of tools for setting up references. For instance, to cite a website, choose cite web, and then fill in as many fields as possible in the little window that pops up (you don't have to do them all), and the tool will write the correct template text for you. It also has a useful preview function that will show you what the reference will look like. Elemimele (talk) 07:11, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you guys! Apollo468 12:09, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Apollo468 There are tools like ReFill that fill in references like

<ref>www.example.com</ref>

 ― Qwerfjkltalk 06:57, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

How to become a host of teahouse

 Taknk (talk) 02:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Go to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host start. Mattplaysthedrums (talk) 04:01, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Before you try to answer other editors' questions, you need to make yourself familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. For example, you need to understand the purpose of a user page. The present content of yours is not appropriate, and would be liable to speedy deletion under criterion U5. If you intend it to be a draft of an article you need to move it either to Draft userspace or to a user subpage, and you should also read the guidance at WP:Your first article. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:00, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Taknk. In order to be an effective Teahouse host, you should have enough experience on the English Wikipedia to be able to explain Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and editing procedures to less experienced editors in a friendly way. It seems that most of your experience is in adding Marathi language content (according to Google Translate) to your user talk page. To be honest, I see no evidence that you are anywhere near experienced enough to be a Teahouse host. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:13, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Page

how to add page? WWei330 (talk) 06:04, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, WWei330. If by "add page", you mean "write an encyclopedia article", then read and study Your first article. Writing a successful Wikipedia article is more difficult than most people think, but on the other hand, we have almost 6.4 million articles in English now. If you go about it right, you can be successful. If you don't, it will be a frustrating experience for you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:36, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen WWei330 (talk) 10:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Rounding numerical values — which method?

I'm currently editing the "Isotopes of helium" page and updating the values of the atomic masses to those in AME2020. Some of the uncertainties of the atomic masses in AME2020 are given to more than 2 significant figures, and so in order to give the atomic masses with two significant figures in the uncertainty (which, as far as I can tell, is the most common practice), I need to round some of the values off. However, I'm not entirely sure which rounding method is normally used on Wikipedia — is it "round half up", or is it "round half to even"?

Thanks in advance! :) — MeasureWell (talk) 03:57, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MeasureWell. The only advice I could find is at Help:Convert#Rounding. Maybe another editor can find more. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:03, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I assume the original question asks whether 1.05 should be rounded to 1.1 or 1.0. If we had a uniform convention, I would expect it to be written in MOS:UNCERTAINTY; it is not the case so I guess no such convention exists. I do not think the behaviour of the {{convert}} template in that regard is of any great authority. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:46, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm guessing that the problem here is that the errors are given to a higher precision than the numbers on which they are errors. So, for example, you could have a number like 1.234 ± 0.0045. In the article on Helium isotopes, the errors are given in concise form, where the error is quoted in brackets after the main number, with the assumption that the right-most digit of the number in brackets corresponds to the right-most digit of the main number, meaning that had the value been 1.234±0.004 you'd have been fine, it would have been quoted as 1.234(4). But with an error 0.0045 the right hand digit (5) overshoots the right hand digit of 1.234 and must be lost in some way. If this is the case, my answer is this: given that the actual decimals in the masses of helium, and in the errors in their determination (as quoted in the source) are actually deemed significant (by the source), and we are interested in precise values here, not approximate ones (otherwise we'd simply call 4He "4"), I don't think you should be rounding at all. I think that if the source gives exact numbers that cannot be represented in the compact form, then you should revert to using full errors in the format 1.234 ± 0.0045. This is, in any case, more widely understood. Compact form, for example, is never used by biologists (but then again, nor is Helium!). Elemimele (talk) 14:31, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm with Elemimele, I don't think users should be rounding important, precise numbers like that. A related aside: An IP user has gone through EVERY British election article and they have introduced rounding errors in almost every single one. They ignored the correct figure from the reliable source and did their own calculation, failing to realise that they were using already rounded numbers. So I say go with what the reliable source says over presentation conventions - X201 (talk) 15:20, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele: @Tigraan: Thanks for the replies guys. From the current conversation here, I'm assuming that the consensus is that I write out the uncertainty in full? For context, the reason that I asked this question was because NUBASE2020 gives the atomic mass of helium-7 as 7.027 990 652, with an uncertainty of 0.000 008 115. If I round the uncertainty to two significant figures, I get 0.000 0081, which means that the atomic mass of helium-7 should then be given to the seventh decimal place. However, the problem was that the next digit immediately after '6' was a '5', and, like I said in my original comment, I wasn't 100% sure of which rounding method to use.

Hope this gives a bit more context! :) — MeasureWell (talk) 00:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@MeasureWell: in this context I'd definitely go with the full precision for both values, because when we're reporting figures whose nature is precise, we should trust the original author to have used appropriate precision and we shouldn't mislead our readers into thinking we're quoting a number at the full precision of the source when in fact we've rounded it (if we say the mass of Helium is about 4, then it's obvious we've rounded; if we give umpteen decimals, it implies we're quoting the current exact state of human knowledge). Also, weirdly, the error is itself a measurement (of the uncertainty of the mean mass) and has its own error, which we do not know, so we don't know how many figures are significant in the error! But thank you so much for thinking about this, rather than just sticking a number in, that no one else would have been able to assess. Elemimele (talk) 09:55, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele: Thanks! I'll go edit the article (as well as the "Isotopes of hydrogen" article, since I inadvertently rounded off the values as well) right now. Also, another question: is it possible to add this to MOS:UNCERTAINTY or something, so that no one else needs to pose this question in the future? —MeasureWell (talk) 11:45, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@MeasureWell: it'd certainly make sense, but that goes beyond my abilities. I'm still a newbie here. Elemimele (talk) 12:27, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Block durations

Why are many blocks on IPs for vandalism given a 31 hour duration? Is there anything special about a duratoin of 1 day and 7 hours? dudhhr_Contribs 21:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

It's so that they can't just come back after strictly a day and resume the same crap. Helpful against vandals editing from specific spots (i.e. schools, libraries, businesses). —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 21:19, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Dudhhr, Jéské Couriano is correct. The 31 hour duration is part of the standard pull-down menu that administrators use when setting up blocks and has become a popular option for short blocks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:48, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I actually kinda wanna see what the admin pull-down menu looks like just so I can understand what an admin's options are when performing admin actions. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 15:51, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Speaking from experience, it's not very exciting. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 15:59, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: The pull-down menu for block duration contains a variety of options for numbers of hours, days, weeks, months and years, as well as "infinite", but an admin can enter absolutely any time by hand even if it's not on the menu. Deor (talk) 16:36, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

interesting. Honestly, if I were to ever become an admin (which probably won't happen for many years) my first action would be to block myself for a few seconds if that is possible and allowed. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 16:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf I'm fairly sure an admin managed to block themselves until some time in the 20th century (1970?). See Wikipedia:Village stocks. ― Qwerfjkltalk 06:48, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh ya I saw that. It still makes no sense ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:27, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Club kits

How to make club kits Bharat0078 (talk) 05:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Bharat0078. Do you mean for an infobox? Which sport? If you want a specific club then name it. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

PrimeHunter yes infobox I have lots of clubs which I want to make kits according to their own in real life. Hyderya Sports FC Corbett FC Madan Maharaj FC many other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bharat0078 (talk • contribs)

Hello, Bharat0078. See Template:Football kit, which I think has instructions for making new ones. --ColinFine (talk) 11:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bharat0078: The mentioned articles are football clubs using Template:Infobox football club. See the template page for documentation. Apart from adding a number 1, 2 or 3 to the parameter name to enable three kits, I think it works the same as Template:Football kit. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:46, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

How does a "weasel word" tag get finally removed from an article

I assisted with an article and it was tagged with the "weasel word" caution statement. I tried to remove all potential weasel words and some other editors did likewise. The article is now free from weasel words, but the warning is still on the article. How does it finally get removed? Is there a search engine that will look at it periodically, or does this have to be done by a person? Thanks. Walt500 (talk) 17:48, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Walt500: You can do that yourself if you're sure. Go for it. Lectonar (talk) 17:56, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Lucian W. Dressel. @Walt500: While you are able to do it yourself, you should not remove that kind of tag from an article if you have any connection to the subject. You uploaded a photo of the person the article is about, and claimed that it is your own work; if that is correct, it looks like you are connected to Dressel. More information here. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 18:09, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Question about the Wikipedia app for iOS

Moved to WP:VPT

 – Interstellarity (talk) 18:36, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Help With Conflict Of Interest

Hello,

If a website was sued by a subject, then is using that website's article liable? Wouldn't it create a COI? For example: If subject sues ABCDE.com, then using ABCDE references would be a COI on the subject's page, right? They would be biased and stuff? Especially when ABCDE is entirely run by ONLY THREE PEOPLE? I am getting involved in an edit war and want to get experts' opinion because the reverter has a bad record of deletion. The page is already been edited by one of the reporters who was directly involved in a lawsuit with the subject, thus creating an entirely biased edit history. SAMsohot (talk) 19:23, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

This must be about Walter Soriano. SAMsohot, which particular website are you referring to? BTW, the word you want is "libel", not "liable". Maproom (talk) 20:44, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, SAMsohot. The place to discuss the reliability of a source is Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. The best advice I can give you is do not get involved in an edit war because you can get blocked for that behavior. Use other forms of Dispute resolution instead. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:04, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Maproom@Cullen328: I am talking about The7Eye, I have made the changes on the page, please see the history. This reference "https://www.themarker.com/law/.premium-1.8283173" clearly states that the The7eye is a direct COI. Another COI involved comes from the lawsuit filed against Forensic News. Thanks for the advice! SAMsohot (talk) 21:09, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@SAMsohot: What you're describing here seems to be more a case of using a biased/primary source, rather than COI editing (which on wikipedia normally refers to editors writing about things they are directly involved with). Generally you can use these kind of sources for simple, uncontroversial facts (like the fact that the lawsuit exists, or what the claims in the lawsuit are) and attributed opinion (In this case what the parties view of the lawsuit is), see WP:BIASEDSOURCES and WP:PRIMARY. Most of what you removed looks like it would probably be OK to stay in the article to be honest, things like a count of the number of lawsuits should be OK being sourced to involved parties unless there is a dispute over the number. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 21:16, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@192.76.8.74: Nope! I am talking about COI. Not primary sources. Let's say that you work for ABC and I file a lawsuit against ABC and you, so using ABC articles is a COI? Also, the person was directly involved as he was one of the reporters the lawsuit was filed against. And the things I removed were unreferenced. It was some wordssmithing to avoid direct facts. I have discussed the COI on the talk page. SAMsohot (talk) 21:26, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

SAMsohot, you have been deleting referenced content, apparently on the grounds that anyone who criticises Soriano has a conflict of interest. I have reverted your most recent edits. Maproom (talk) 21:29, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Maproom Why don't you understand? Did you even look at the talk page? If you want to revert then revert to the point before the IP addresses started editing. AND REFERENCED? Not Bombardment? I have literally read the references and then made the changes. Nothing I changed was untrue. And you guys are even reverting the Infobox and stuff. What is even wrong with you all? SAMsohot (talk) 21:33, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @SAMsohot: No, Using ABC would be an example of a biased, primary source, just like an interview with the people involved in a lawsuit. You can use these kind of sources for information in articles, as long as you are careful with what you are referencing to them. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 21:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@192.76.8.74: So biased blog like references are applicable? Even if they talk wrongly? Using references from a site that runs by a few people? And even if the person who added them has COI? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Scottstedman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Walter_Soriano SAMsohot (talk) 21:41, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@SAMsohot: There is no requirement that sources be unbiased, and no ban on sourcing information to people involved in events. Perhaps it would help if I illustrated with an example? Imagine Example company 1 sues Example company 2, and example company 2 releases a statement on their website about the lawsuit.

• You can use the website for simple uncontroversial facts, e.g. "On the 3 August 2037 Example company 1 sued Example company 2 alleging patent infringement"
• You can use the website for attributed opinion, e.g. "Example comapny 2 described the claims as "baseless" and said they would fight the case in court"
• You cannot use the website for analysis, material that is unduly self serving, is disputed, involves claims about third parties, ect., e.g. it would be inappropriate to write "The lawsuit was described as being without standing" soured to the website without attribution.

I would also ask you to carefully read WP:OUTING before making any more speculations on who someone may be. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 21:51, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

SAMsohot, I became thoroughly confused reading the above, because you kept talking about a source being COI: COI is not about sources, it's about editors. Now I've looked at the talk page I see that you are arguing that the editors who inserted the material are connected with the source, and so had a COI: that makes sense, (but you did not once explain above that that's what you meant). However material is not necessarily removed from an article just because it was inserted by an editor with a COI: it is up to a consensus of editors to decide whether to keep it, modify it, or delete it. You deleted it, and other editors have reverted. It is now up to you to discuss the matter with those other editors to reach consensus. If you think the material should be removed, you need to present your case in a way that the other editors will understand and be persuaded by it: saying "It's a COI" doesn't do that, and nor does insulting the other editors. --ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi I'm back. The maps person.

They said they agreed maps need citations, albeit it was a lengthy discussion. How do I go about informing the author about the lack of citation? Just message them? For non English speaking/writing authors, could I contact one of the other volunteers on Wikipedia who could translate the "Inform lack of citation" message? And then if author/poster of the image does not contact me back within X days, I delete it? If so, how would I do that?

Along the way there has to be forms or something... right? I apologize for the bullets of questions. I just want to know how to do the correct thing to hold up Wikipedia's methods and standards. GalacticKiss (talk) 00:12, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, GalacticKiss. First, it would be helpful if you linked to the discussion you're talking about: most of the people who read this will not have been following the discussion and will not be familiar with its conclusions. I see that it is WP:NORN#Maps without citations, and while the two editors who joined you in the discussion agreed, that is a couple of editors agreeing with you, not a sanction for making major changes. You can of course cite that discussion when arguing your case, but please don't claim that it is Wikipedia policy that every map must be cited, or some such.

There is no point in "informing the author", and indeed it may not even be possible: most articles have many authors, sometimes hundreds of them; and there is no guarantee that the editor who inserted the map is still active on Wikipedia, or continues to have any interest in the article. You are the one who is pushing for these changes, so they're most likely to get done if you do them yourself.

So your best course is to edit the articles, adding the reference. Obviously that is going to take a lot of time and effort, which you may not be able to put in. The next best thing is to bring it up on the talk page of each article. You could also add {{citation needed}} to the individual maps; but since many people will not be aware of your discussion, if you do that you should certainly add a section to the talk page explaining.

You should also go to WP:WPMAP. There has been at least some discussion on citing sources in their archived talk pages (eg WT:WikiProject Maps/Archive 2011#Citing sources). --ColinFine (talk) 11:29, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! You are correct on all points. GalacticKiss (talk) 22:03, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

View history error/glitch

This is probably nothing but, when clicking view history on any article, userpage, talk page, etc. or when checking userpages: the link for newest and oldest are currently showing up as paalika and keka for me on two different devices, Is anyone else seeing this or know what the heck is going on here? Lavalizard101 (talk) 20:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lavalizard101, welcome to the Tehaouse. I don't see it. Please always include an example, even if something appears to be everywhere. What is your language setting at Special:Preferences? The default is "en - English". Does it happen with uselang=en? Does it happen if you log out? Does it happen in safemode? PrimeHunter (talk) 20:53, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

After a bit of fiddling with the language setting, it appears to only happen when my language preference is set to en-GB- British English. So it appears to be an issue with the en-GB British English language setting, it is also happening on one of my old sockpuppet accounts (which I briefly logged into to see if it occurred there as well). Lavalizard101 (talk) 21:18, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Lavalizard101: Yes, this is wrong values at MediaWiki:Histfirst/en-gb and MediaWiki:Histlast/en-gb. It has been fixed at translatewiki.[2][3] That means it will automatically be fixed here at the next message import by the developers. I don't know when that will be. By choosing en-gb you get a handful of British spellings but miss a lot of customizations at the English Wikipedia, for example links to our policies, processes and help pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:00, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@Primehunter:, it appears to have been partially fixed but now displays (newest | newest) instead of (newest | oldest) and their is a problem with the save icon on the prefernece saving as well for en-gB language preference. Lavalizard101 (talk) 21:43, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

fix ping @PrimeHunter:. Lavalizard101 (talk) 21:44, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Lavalizard101: The real fix hasn't been deployed yet. Somebody attempted a temporary fix at MediaWiki:Histfirst/en-gb and MediaWiki:Histlast/en-gb but accidentally saved the same in both. I have fixed that. The other messages (there are several) will be fixed when the real fix is deployed, maybe Monday. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:10, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Why can’t some articles be edited?

 NOTHWE (talk) 22:13, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

NOTHWE Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If there is a certain article that prompted this question, it would help to know what it is, but in general articles are protected from editing due to persistent vandalism or disruptive editing such as an edit war. There are different levels of protection as well. If you want to make an edit to an article but cannot do so, you may make an edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, detailing exactly what edit you want to see happen. 331dot (talk) 22:16, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @NOTHWE: Hello NOTHWE, welcome to the teahouse!

Some articles are protected to prevent certain groups of editors from editing them, this can happen for a number of reasons, e.g. because they have been repeatedly vandalised, because they are very highly visible (like the main page and certain templates) or because they are in a topic area that is covered by sanctions due to a history of disruption, see the Protection policy for more information on the various kinds of protection in use. If you would like to suggest changes to a page that is protected then you can make an Edit requests on the talk page. Hope this helps, 192.76.8.74 (talk) 22:18, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

administrator deleted my sandbox

Why did an administrator delete my own sandbox because of "vandalism"? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 17:35, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@The Tips of Apmh: Why don't you ask him directly? Lectonar (talk) 17:54, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

How do I do that? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 18:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, The Tips of Apmh. If you want to know why another editor did something (whether an admin or not), the best thing is to ask them: people at the Teahouse may or may not be able to suggest a reason. I agree it's unusual to delete a sandbox under WP:G3 - WP:U5 would be more usual - but since I'm not an admin I can't look at the deleted page and see what was in it. I suggest you ask Bbb23 (I have pinged them, so they'll see this discussion). --ColinFine (talk) 17:59, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, The Tips of Apmh. You have had quite a few drafts deleted in recent days. It seems that you are trying to add content that does not comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines. Please be cautious. Continuing on this path may lead to your account being blocked. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:52, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Hi, could you please tell me what I am doing wrong? The Tips of Apmh (talk) 03:51, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Your ping failed. You cannot type an "@" directly to make a ping, and you cannot add a ping after your signed message has already been published. See Template:Reply to for how to ping. Meters (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Blog pieces as reliable sources about living persons

Could editors please look at the discussion on the The Last Days Talk page and provide feedback on this issue on that Talk page? There are several problems with an edit that caused me to have concerns because the editor cited an unreliable source about a living person that is a Holocaust survivor. Specifically, the editor's source is from a newspaper's blog section. The blog piece discusses a different blog piece examining the accuracy of the Holocaust survivor's memory. I reverted the edit, and the editor contested this. I made a temporary edit while waiting to hear what other editors have to say about this, and the editor was okay with this. Both the sourced blog piece and the blog piece that was discussed in the source were written by scholars. However, I have found no evidence that the newspaper has full editorial control over their blog section, and a citation says this newspaper publishes 9,000 bloggers. While the perspective of these scholars might be important and relevant to the The Last Days documentary film, the source is problematic and I found no other sources that offer a similar perspective. JJMM (talk) 02:57, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

If the blogger in question is an expert in the subject of the blog article, it should be OK to cite. If the blogger is a journalist on the staff of the newspaper, it should be OK to cite. If the blogger is a guest writer or some random person who happens to have a blog hosted by that newspaper, I'd say no. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I just replied to your feedback on the Talk page before I saw your comment here. JJMM (talk) 05:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Updating Janet Jackson Total Album Sales To The Correct Number.

Janet Jackson total album sales have been wrong for a long time on the site. Her sales should be updated to over 180 Million Albums Sold. I will post several links below to support the change to the accurate number.

https://www.aenetworks.com/article/lifetime-and-ae-release-teaser-trailer-for-janet

https://www.indiewire.com/2021/09/janet-jackson-lifetime-documentary-1234666707/

https://top40-charts.com/news.php?nid=170461&cat= Rodneygunn (talk) 07:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Rodneygunn Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please direct this comment to the article talk page, Talk:Janet Jackson, where the editors that follow that article can see it. 331dot (talk) 07:50, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

review draf please

Hello, can you review my draf please. I add more sources. Sulovari (talk) 11:09, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

You presumably didn't notice what it says in the box on your draft: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 6 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,707 pending submissions waiting for review." --David Biddulph (talk) 11:36, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Mickie McGowan -- ColinFine (talk) 11:39, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

ARE YOU UNDECLARED PAID? Curious as to how you recently started your account and your first two activities were to create articles about an Albanian politician and an American movies voice actor. 157.157.52.49 (talk) 11:47, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

• @Sulovari, hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I note that KylieTastic is the declining reviewer. You see, coming to the Teahouse is a good move but even better, is to try and initiate a dialogue with the declining reviewer, that way, you get to learn what and what you need to correct or adjust before re-submitting. Now, speaking on re-submissions, it appears the article was declined barely 46 hours ago. It is frustrating for reviewers when you binge submit articles without addressing the problem. Celestina007 (talk) 17:24, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Creating editor di make the draft 50% longer before resubmitting, assumption being addressed Decline comments. Query about PAID still hanging. 157.157.52.49 (talk) 08:32, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Do you need to ask before editing an article?

Are you meant to do so? If yes, where do I ask? If no, what next? ElectricGirl123 (talk) 23:52, 25 September 2021 (UTC) ElectricGirl123 (talk) 23:52, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@ElectricGirl123: Welcome, and thanks for wanting to improve Wikipedia. No, you don't need to ask. See WP:BRD. Wikipedia encourages editors to be bold. If someone disagrees with your edit, they will revert it, and then you can discuss on the article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 23:56, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

ElectricGirl123, simply ask yourself whether your edit will improve the encyclopedia. If your sincere answer is "yes", then make the edit.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:22, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Thanks, I'll be aware of this. Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 08:59, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Need help

Hi! I need anyone who would like to help me to know what, how and when I can create an article. Is there anyone there? Banzhowen (talk) 11:14, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Banzhowen: Hello and Welcome to the Teahouse. Sucessfully creating a new article from scratch is one of the harder tasks around here, and its harder than it often seems. ColinFine, an expeirenced user, said this about a similar question about 7 days ago:

I'm afraid that your question (which is one we get often at this page) is a bit like "How can I build a house?" The best answer to that is "First, spend a few years learning the trade of house-building". A Wikipedia article isn't quite as big and complicated as a house, so I would say months rather than years; but experience shows that people who come here and start trying to create an article before they have learnt quite a lot about how Wikipedia works usually have a frustrating and disappointing time, I strongly suggest that you put that idea aside for a few months, while you work on improving some of our existing six million articles (most of them could be improved) and learning how the huge monster that is Wikipedia actually works.

— User:ColinFine, here

That being said, I have left a welcome message on your talkpage, which includes a link to this helppage, which should assist you creating a new article. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:56, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Indigenous Material

what is recommended when dealing with indigenous references? My subject underwent a ceremony bestowing an honour on him which cannot be verified by contemporary standards

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ashley_Crawford_(journalist) Viraload (talk) 06:53, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

First of all, have you disclosed your COI (see Wikipedia:DISCLOSEPAY)? ― Qwerfjkltalk 07:11, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Viraload (talk) 07:17, 26 September 2021 (UTC) yes, on my user page Viraload (talk) 07:47, 26 September 2021 (UTC) from what I can make out, there is some discussion about the oral document becoming a source but at this time we are advised not to include such "unverifiable" accounts

@Viraload: all information in Wikipedia must be publicly available in published sources. This excludes oral tradition, which has garnered us some criticism from outsiders, but the fact of the matter is that so many people (whether paid actors or amateur vandals) come to add false information to Wikipedia that we need a system that makes it easy for experienced editors to verify information. Take a look at the essay Wikipedia:Oral history. — Bilorv (talk) 12:02, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

musical notability criteria for unreleased music

theres an article i'm trying to make and it's for an unreleased single. it will be released on September 27, 2021. what kind of references should i use? i've used some references but the person said that it needs reliable sources although i've put them already. could you please help me find a proper example for this too? thx BaaBaaTheSheep^{(talk • ctb)} 08:07, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Bad Love (Key song).

Please see Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Songs within the broader Wikipedia:Notability (music), to which the reviewer @Robert McClenon: has already referred you, for the specific criteria applied to such a case. A source may be reliable for corroborating a fact about a subject (in this case a song), but still not sufficient to demonstrate the song's Notability.

It seems to me that it would be very exceptional for a song to qualify as Notable even before it has been released. If this were not so, every song ever released would qualify for an article.

See also WP:TOOSOON. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.67.3 (talk) 08:29, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Nobody will remember either an IPv4 address or an IPv6 address. Just register an account. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

That isn't the intention, I just use it to ensure continuity of identity in a given conversation (since I have a dynamic IP), not to have people associate all my posts with an established identity and 'reputation', which would be contrary to my wiki-principles. I've been IP-editing here for 16 years and will continue to do so as long as it's permitted or until I decide otherwise (which I might, for my reasons). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.67.3 (talk) 12:56, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Should the article Bad Love (EP), which seems closely related, also be moved to draft for further review? Feline Hymnic (talk) 10:38, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Feline Hymnic, User:BaaBaaTheSheep - Just wait until the album is released, including the song. Some editors are in too much of a hurry to get articles on songs and albums before they are released, when there is very little of encyclopedic value, just gossip and chatter. However, with the release in two days, there is also little reason to push the album article into draft space, even though it jumped the gun also. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

The topic of this thread is "musical notability criteria for unreleased music", which can be summarized as "very little notability until release". Robert McClenon (talk) 00:14, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

Do you do test edits in your sandbox userpage or your sandbox talk page? Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 10:51, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Your test edits would be at User:ElectricGirl123/sandbox, which you have started. If anyone wishes to discuss that page, they would do so at User talk:ElectricGirl123/sandbox. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:04, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Thank you, I will take notice of that and edit at my sandbox. Is there an article about MeowChat? I'd be delighted to create my first article. Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 11:17, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@ElectricGirl123: Welcome to the Teahouse. You can make test edits in your own sandbox or the community sandbox, though the latter is periodically wiped. There doesn't seem to be an article about MeowChat, so if you're interested in starting one, I'd suggest reading through Your first article carefully and follow the Articles for Creation process by starting a draft. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:11, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

ARTICLE

How to start a ARTICLE Bdetfehigj (talk) 16:05, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Your user talk page has a welcome message with a number of useful links, one of which is WP:Your first article. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:08, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

German humour!

This is more a comment than a question, though I'd still welcome opinions! I'm busy translating a German wikipedia article to create a draft at Draft:Gasolin_AG, and came across a lovely comment in the original German article that Gasolin proposed a helicopter-operated air-petrol-delivery service by which broken-down vehicles could be refilled, the pilot radioing the details of the car number plate and petrol supplied, to a local admin centre. I was busy typing away, and adding the reference, when I noticed it was 1st April. This fact is presented in a thoroughly dead-pan way in the German Wikipedia. Of all the hazards one expects in translating a German page, bumping into a lovely example of German humour wasn't one I'd envisaged. Now I have no idea whether to include this "fact", or consider it highly suspicious and exclude it, or to translate in equally dead-pan style. It is so beautifully poised on the boundary between believable and far-fetched. To be on the safe-side, I am omitting it. I am rather sad. Elemimele (talk) 11:26, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Elemimele. When translating an article, what is important is whether what you produce meets English Wikipedia standards, in particular on sourcing. You are free to translate as much or as little of the original as you choose, and to rewrite it as much or as little as you choose. If the hoax in the German is cited to a reliable source (presumably that reveals that it is a hoax) then your translation could do likewise. Otherwise, it has no business being in the en-wiki article. (I strongly suspect that it should be removed from the de-wiki article as well). --ColinFine (talk) 11:43, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: it's from 1961, so we will probably never know! I've posed the question on the talk-page at German WP in case someone there with a better understanding of German culture can assess the chances. Even if it was a hoax, I doubt there's a source to say so, given the time that's passed. Thanks for reassuring me that I can miss it out. I think I might submit in the current state and see what people think. Elemimele (talk) 11:48, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Elemimele, I hardly think that "Landscape and Garden Design Advisor", even if it existed, is going to be a reliable source on this subject! --ColinFine (talk) 12:03, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine hey, the author's a Diplomlandwirt Dr Agr.! How can you possibly doubt his word? I can almost see his upright respectability from here! Yes, this is surely a magazine's bit of fun for April, and best left out. Elemimele (talk) 12:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

And judging by this, Elemimele, a 1961 edition should have been in volume 27, not volume 13. I don't think it was a magazine's bit of fun: I think it was a bit of Wikipedia vanadalism masquerading as an April Fool joke. -ColinFine (talk) 14:16, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Let me start deadpan: (We) Germans don't do humour, this is well known. In consequence, the joke has been enfernt from the article in DE-Wikipedia. Lectonar (talk) 17:32, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Lectonar:, @ColinFine: Ohje, my sole contribution to German WP: to induce the the stamping-out of Germanic humour... I am not proud of this act! I notice that English WP does have a terribly serious article on German_humour, and Gråbergs Gråa Sång has pointed out Rhinogradentia, which is absolutely gorgeous. Elemimele (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Reminds me of Joan Fontcuberta#Fauna (1987), Elemimele. --ColinFine (talk) 22:05, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Anecdotal evidence to the contrary: John Cleese says that once when he checked into a hotel in Germany, a German guest called out from across the lobby "Hey, John! Don't mention the war, ok!", and the room exploded in laughter. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:46, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Concise reference section

Is this feature of French wikipedia also exist in English? Mosesheron (talk) 21:45, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mosesheron: Not quite sure what you're referring to. If you mean the short form references then yes, they exist, have a look at Template:Sfn. If you're talking about the scrolling list then the equivalent template here was deleted in 2007 following Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 11#Template:Scrollref. If you want to make a scrolling list you can use something like Template:Scrolling window or Template:Scroll box, but these must not be used in articles. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 22:28, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

How to view drafts?

How to view my drafts? which button should I press? Help please? MrDude1881 (talk) 00:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@MrDude1881: Hello MrDude1881, welcome to the teahouse!

You can see a link of all the edits you have made by looking at your contributions: Special:Contributions/MrDude1881. There's also a much more detailed edit counter availiable on the WMF labs server, which includes useful things like a list of all the pages you've started https://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/MrDude1881. Hope this helps, 192.76.8.74 (talk) 01:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

How to deal with an IP range messing up templates on one article?

At List of Talking Tom & Friends (TV series) episodes, an IP range (first 4 character sets are matching in all 3 addresses) has been messing up templates. Their first disruptive edit spree was on 17 September, then they made three edits yesterday with an 8-hour gap between each edit, all of which were reverted. I will be taking action if he does this one more time, but which of these would be an appropriate course of action?

1. Request PCP for the page and let reviewers block the bad edits (can allow good edits if the editor changes, and can also stop other vandals, but needs a pending changes reviewer to spend time checking edits)
2. Request a range-block for these IP addresses specifically for the aforementioned article (can completely stop this problem as long as he stays on that IP range but won't stop him if he moves to a different IP range (though it is unlikely IMO that he'll move to another range))

Thanks, Tube·of·Light 03:48, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tube of Light: None of those. The range is too broad to block, and PCP is usually not effective in reducing workload of the good editors; they still have to check and approve or revert the disruptive edits, which is somewhat more work. Semi-protection seems like the better alternative. I have semi-protected the article for two weeks. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:30, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, @Anachronist! So if I understand correctly, PCP would be useful only if there were many other good editors who could be restricted by semi-protection? Tube·of·Light 03:22, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tube of Light: That rarely occurs. If there are many other good editors, they'll notice when vandalism happens and revert it without the need for protection. PCP can be useful in low-volume articles with few watchers and few editors. In that case the vandalism is permitted but it doesn't appear until a reviewer comes along and approves it. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:15, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Understood. Tube·of·Light 02:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

are Fangans notable subjects, and how do I get information from credible sources on them?

Context: a Fangan (short for fanganronpa) is a fanmade, original story modelled after the video game series Danganronpa by Spike Churnsoft. I usually see fangans in the form of playable games, video series's, and text on fanfiction sites. There is currently no wiki page for fangans, and I want to create one. However, I am not sure if there are any credible sources on them that Wikipedia will accept. please help im desperate Itsaraggedyphrog (talk) 02:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Itsaraggedyphrog: Welcome to the Teahouse. You might want to browse WikiProject Video Games' reliable sources to see if any of them talk about the fangames in significant detail. Otherwise you're probably better off contributing to a wiki specifically for Danganronpa. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

DavidJMoss Draft:Tobey C Moss Gallery. my latest submission does not show up under "History".

 Courtesy link: Draft:Tobey C. Moss Gallery
My webpage was rejected on July 9th by Robertsky and I resubmitted it on Aug 31st with corrections based on his and prior input. Why doesn't my resubmission show up under "history". The only way I found it was by going to user contributions, which makes no sense. And, how do I see where the corrections are in the queue? DavidJMoss (talk) 20:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC) DavidJMoss (talk) 20:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@DavidJMoss: I'm not too sure as to what you're asking, but you introduced copyrighted content (not okay), which has resulted in a slew of revisions deleted. As of this diff you have not resubmitted it for review. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi DavidJMoss. In addition to what Tenryuu posted about above "copyrighted content", the fact that you began you Teahouse question with My webpage was rejected sort of indicates (at least to me) that you might be misunderstanding something quite important about Wikipedia. I suggest taking a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for some more information about what kinds of subjects are generally considered OK to try and create Wikipedia articles about. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:42, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

To answer your specific question, DavidJMoss, you made some edits to the article on 31 August, but it doesn't appear that you resubmitted it for review. --ColinFine (talk) 21:49, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

DavidJMoss, I think this gallery is probably notable and probably deserves a Wikipedia article, but the promotional tone of your draft is shooting yourself in the foot. The neutral point of view is a core content policy and is non-negotiable, even about businesses thst have closed. When you write something like It showcased Los Angeles and California modernism from the 1930s through the 1990s, steering collectors and museum curators away from the male-dominated East Coast art scene toward Southern California artists and women artists, then please be aware that neutral, uninvolved editors see that as the sort of PR language that might have been written by a Southern California advertising agent. And then when you write My webpage was rejected, that is another strike against you. Wikipedia is not a web host for individual webpages. It is an encyclopedia containing neutrally written, properly referenced educational articles, and it is not a venue for any promotional activity whatsoever. Sorry to be tough, but you need to know the facts at the beginning. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:51, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Archiving my Talk Pages

Is there a way to convert my talk page archiving from monthly to yearly? I realized retrospectively that a monthly archive will lead to dozens and dozens of archive links if I continue to edit for a few years. TipsyElephant (talk) 17:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi TipsyElephant! You can change the "archive" parameter on the MiszaBot config template. Setting it to User talk:TipsyElephant/%(year)d will work, but keep in mind this won't convert your existing archives, as you'd have to do that yourself. To make the archives box on your talk page show the year-based archives, {{Archives|image=none|{{Center|{{Yearly archive list|prefix=}}}}}} should look fairly similar. Best regards, Vukky! :) ^{(talk • contributions)} 07:25, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

2022 and 2023 movies page:

Can I edit 2022 and 2023 movies please? There's no movies for August 2022 for some reason and no one put movies for 2023 in a month and there's heaps to add. Dinoman21 (talk) 07:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

• @Dinoman21: Go ahead, with one caveat: as indicated in WP:NFF, Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles(...). I would think that such films should not appear in list articles, either, for the same reason (many projects get scrapped at that stage). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Lock page

 2405:204:3484:231B:BF91:EAB1:91FC:29FB (talk) 06:27, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP, could you be more specific about your question? Requests for page protection are done at WP:RFPP. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP. If you mean "lock an article to the version I want it to have", then I'm afraid the answer is a resounding and emphatic "No!" Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopaedia: almost anybody can edit almost any article within Wikipedia's rules. --ColinFine (talk) 11:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

How to report disruptive editing/vandalism?

Hi, how should I go about reporting a user or IP address that is clearly engaged in vandalism and similar behaviours? Tamptonato (talk) 13:17, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tamptonato: You can report vandalism to WP:AIV. Assuming this is about 2600:387:C:2E12:0:0:0:117 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), Zzuuz has set that one into read-only mode for 12 hours. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:55, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Aligning side by side tables

Hello again, the tables under the heading "Mouse varieties" in the mouse tutorial for ETH Oberon are now side by side but misaligned. Misaligned in Firefox and in Chrome. The lowermost two tables on the page align nicely. Help fixing the misalignment will be appreciated. Thanks, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 03:31, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@PeterEasthope: Hello, welcome to the teahouse! I think I've fixed the issue for you, what I've done is add vertical-align:top; to get the tables aligned at their top. I think the underlying issue here is that in two of the tables you have two sub tables, in the other you have one sub table and an empty table. The parser automatically supresses the rendering of empty table rows, wo whatever point it was using for vertical alignment was in a different place in the single sub table table. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 04:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@192.76.8.74: Thanks for fixing alignment and centering. Nice! ... PeterEasthope (talk) 14:00, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Is there any mechanism for adding tooltips to images?

...Specifically, multiple tooltips? I've got a group image in an article, and the photo contains many people who have their own articles, and I'd love to be able to have mouseover tooltips for people looking at the image. I could do it with a "From left to right, starting in the back row..." text caption underneath, but the people aren't standing in clear rows, and it would be a lot less clunky and awkward if there's a way to add active areas within the image. Thanks, EVhotrodder (talk) 12:05, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi EVhotrodder. You can add tooltips with links to the articles with mw:Extension:ImageMap. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:00, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Perfect! Thank you so much! EVhotrodder (talk) 14:04, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Who controls Wikipedia Bots?

I edited an Wikipedia article; All was well for about a week until I attempted to make minor format changes mid-edit ClueBot NG restored the prior edition of the article "Lp space". ClueBot NG viewed by edits as vandalism. How can I restore my edits? RalphZero (talk) 11:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC) RalphZero (talk) 11:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

RalphZero Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I am not an expert in how bots work, but I would guess that the math formatting that you added may have appeared as vandalism to the bot. You can click on the "Report false positive" link in the edit history of your edit to report that. 331dot (talk) 12:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

As it says here you can report false positives, which will help train the bot. Bots are written by different people for different purposes. The one that reverted your edits is well-documented here. I'd report the false positive first, then try again, and if that doesn't work, contact the bot's authors (who are listed on the page I linked to above). Good luck. EVhotrodder (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@RalphZero: If ClueBot NG thinks an edit should be reverted then it reverts all consecutive edits by the same user. Your second edit [4] modified the first edit in a way which looked suspicious to the bot with the way the diff is interpreted by our software. If you make the same changes in a single edit then it may work. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Why was my addition removed?

Hello I edited a page "New Man(Utopian concept)" to add the category of "Osho's vision of New Man" yesterday. Today it was not there. Can someone help me understand why it was removed? As Ordinary As Anyone (talk) 07:06, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi As Ordinary As Anyone. The edit you made was WP:REVERTed for the reasons given here by an editor named DanCherek. At first glance, the main problems with your edit seem to be that some of the sources you cited in support aren't considered reliable sources for Wikipedia's purposes and that you used quite a lot of (perhaps too much of) quoted material from those sources. If you would like to more clarification from the editor who made the revert, you can go to Talk:New Man (utopian concept) and start a discussion about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:20, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

This was also asked on my talk page so I've answered there. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 12:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi @As Ordinary As Anyone. You can directly cite the book instead of citing non reliable sources. Eevee01^(talk) 14:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm wanted for saying the truth about Abbie Eaton

Abbie Eaton Abbie Eaton came out as lesbian when she was 16, according to her "Behind the Visor" on the official website of W Series. Someone reverted my addition and called it vandalism (!!!) 2A01:36D:1200:4530:1D83:90EA:8771:2BF (talk) 12:00, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The way in which you did it is not the proper format. I would suggest starting a discussion on the article talk page so that you can explain what you are doing to other editors. 331dot (talk) 12:04, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Your edit, however well or badly it was done (and I haven't looked) was, by Wikipedia's own definition, not vandalism--as the reverter termed it. And that User's reversion was not "blatant homophobia"--as you termed it. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:13, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Help!

Hi. I'm partial blocked for copyrighting for 6 months. How can I get rid from this? Can anybody give me suggestions? I'm feeling very bad! Thanks. ➤ Tajwar.thesuperman ^Talk 16:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Tajwar.thesuperman You've made an unblock request; that's the correct thing to do. It will help for you to demonstrate that you know what copyright is, and when and how copyrighted content can be used on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 16:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

hello everyone

 97.77.47.130 (talk) 17:16, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi. ― Qwerfjkltalk 18:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Henry Reynolds discovered the French Broad, my grandfather.

Why is Henry Reynolds not credited with discovery of the FB river? He is on the 1840 census Mechlenburg co. North Carolina as a constable. he wound up in Savannah Tn. Still several decendents here on the Tenn. river, thanks, JAMES E REYNOLDS 75.107.241.5 (talk) 12:07, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Published reliable source to say he discovered French Broad River? --David Biddulph (talk) 13:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi @75.107.241.5:, this can be fixed. You cannot make the change yourself, as you have a conflict of interest, being a close relative of the person about whom you'd like to write. But if you can find a reliable, written source where someone independent of your grandfather states that he discovered the river, you can go to the talk page associated with French Broad River, and post a request that someone add text on your behalf. Give the reference as clearly as you can, and state very precisely what you would like adding to the article. The instructions are at Wikipedia:Simple_conflict_of_interest_edit_request. Note that if you can't find an independent source that backs up the statement, there is no hope of getting it in Wikipedia, no matter how true it's known to be. Wikipedia is a tertiary source, it only reports things that have already been written-about in secondary sources. If you can't find a source, your best bet is to raise awareness amongst local historians in hopes that one of them will be inspired to write about your grandfather. Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 16:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

The French Broad River is in an area inhabited by the Cherokee people for hundreds or perhaps thousands of years before Europeans came to the area, and there were predecessor mound building Native American cultures in that area for millenia So, the notion that your purported grandfather Henry Reynolds discovered this river is false on the face of it. As for Henry Reynolds being your grandfather, if he was a constable in 1840, he must have been born 200 or more years ago. How old was Henry when your father was born, and how old was your father when you were born? What evidence other than family lore do you have for all of this It? It is possible but highly unlikely. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

As Pterry noted, "living there" doesn't count when it comes to exploration. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:52, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I wish I could do maths! I assume by grandfather we're talking "ancestor" here. Elemimele (talk) 12:55, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

"Grandfather" and "Ancestor" have different definitions. David notMD (talk) 13:41, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Here is a page from a book that says there is a "legend" that a Henry Reynolds and another man discovered warm springs in the river (not the river itself) in 1778. It also points out that the Cherokee already knew about the warm springs. That was 62 years before the 1840 description of a Reynolds who was a constable. It is highly unlikely that these were the same men. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Well found! Unfortunately Reynolds is hardly a rare name, and nor is Henry. It is not unlikely that a few of them would have been found around the area. And once you've found one, they will probably have family. Elemimele (talk) 19:36, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

How to create a wikipedia page for my client's website

How to create a wikipedia page for my client's website Sravanthi2233 (talk) 13:00, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

You don't. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 14:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Sravanthi2233 A more general reply to your question is to see WP:PAID. That describes the steps required for creation and submission of drafts of articles if the editor is paid. P.S. The draft would be about your client, not your client's website. This can succeed only if your client meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. David notMD (talk) 14:54, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Then accept that if your client is sufficiently notable that the article passes muster, then s/he might be sufficiently notable that someone else might come behind you and edit the article beyond your recognition, possibly in some way not to your or your client's liking, and with no need of your or your client's approval. It will not be a "page for [your] client's website" or for your client; it will be an encyclopedia article about your client. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:06, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah. Nobody 'owns' articles. David notMD (talk) 17:03, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Sravanthi2233 I'll disagree with David notMD and state that it's possible that a website might meet Wikipedia:Notability (web content) even if your client doesn't meet Wikipedia:Notability (people). What is the website? GoingBatty (talk) 19:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Editing page

 Shrlyn005 (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Shrlyn005 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about editing? 331dot (talk) 20:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Referencing?

How do I reference an article? Why do I need to? Can I be blocked if I don't add references to the articles I create? Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 21:24, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@ElectricGirl123: References are very important to verify the information that's in the encyclopedia, and to assure that it's not original research. Without references, a draft submission will likely be declined. See Help:Referencing for beginners. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@TimTempleton: Thank you, I will read the suggested page. Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 21:41, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

The Four-Wheel Drive Company

I have a copy of the book, "The Four Wheel Drive Story", by Howard William Troyer. Would it be acceptable to add some of the material in the book to the article about the Four Wheel Drive Auto Company? KristonScott (talk) 23:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@KristonScott: It should be no problem as long as you don't copy text from the book. You should also remember to cite the book properly. Use the {{cite book}} template for that. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

It is always worth taking a look at the publisher. In this case, it is McGraw Hill, a respected general publisher at the time that book came out. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Cars 3 Rev-N-Go racer

Is Rev-N-Go racer named or unnamed? Taekhoon (talk) 23:27, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Taekhoon, there is no article titled Rev-N-Go, but I see that you have been busily editing List of Cars characters. If you have a question about its content, please write your question in Talk:List of Cars characters -- Hoary (talk) 00:14, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

False imagery

in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imam_Shamil Iman Shamil image is shown that of Adolf Hitler, I don't know if this is some kind of joke but I think it is greatly disrespectful, and should be fixed as soon as possible 24.152.235.62 (talk) 01:41, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I changed it back to the original image Gordfather69 (talk) 01:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

And the offending editor warned. (You could have done the fix yourself by clicking on View history, and then on Undo for the edit that did the vandalism.) David notMD (talk) 01:49, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Why were these edits not tagged as reverted and reverting?

It appears to me that Special:Diff/1046608849 is an exact revert of Special:Diff/1046500875. I would expect such a revert to be tagged as such, and the reverted edit to be tagged as "Reverted", like this one. (In this case, I would expect the revert to be tagged as a "Manual revert" (like this one), given that there's no tag indicating any tool was used for the reversion.)

Why might it be that these edits were not tagged at all, neither the reverted edit nor the reverting edit?

(Yes, the reverted edit was mine, but I'm not here complaining about being reverted; I see that the reverter is much more experienced than I am (and I accept that it's my fault that I wasn't clearer that I meant 'traditional' in 'scare-quotes').)

—2d37 (talk) 07:27, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@2d37: As far as I am aware, the edit was manually removed by editing the text out, meaning the revert and reverted tags don't apply. The manual revert tag is, as far as I am aware, added later on via a job queue, because it requires the software to compare the current text to a number of previous revisions. Once case for why this doesn't appear therefore can be that there are too many in-between revisions. which means the software will stop comparing before noticing the identical revisions. Because this is a job queue which mainly runs when the servers are under less load, the tags might not appear as quickly as one think (or not at all, sometimes). Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, the software applying the manual revert tag requires the two revisions to be identical. Here a number of inbetween edits changed unrelated parts of the text, resulting in the comparision failing. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Protected pages?

Why are somepages protected from editing, like Facebook or SnapChat? Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 08:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Pages are protected if they have been subjected to persistent vandalism, see Wikipedia:Protection policy. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:42, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@ElectricGirl123, if you check the "Page information" link on an article page, the new page has a "View the protection log for this page." link. There you can find a list of the times an article has been protected, and the protecting admin often leaves a short note why. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:39, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

how to edit

 Pentagram1123 (talk) 09:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Pentagram1123 Try these links: WP:TUTORIAL, WP:ADVENTURE. Perhaps you can be more specific. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:47, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Pentagram1123 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You seem to already understand technically how to make an edit, but your edits seem to be mostly unproductive. Do you have a more specific question? 331dot (talk) 09:47, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

In the welcome link on your user talk page, the words in blue are wikilinks to further guidance. When you've read those, if you have specific questions please feel free to come back here. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:49, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

DavidJMoss Draft:Tobey C Moss Gallery

I have submitted this page for publication after correcting a number of issues brought up by the editors. Will this new version now suffice?DavidJMoss (talk) 03:52, 28 September 2021 (UTC) DavidJMoss (talk) 03:52, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@DavidJMoss: To see if your revised draft will now suffice, you may click the "Resubmit" button so an AfC reviewer will read it. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:09, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

DavidJMoss, your draft relies far too much on name dropping. It is excessive. Wikipedia is not a Hollywood cocktail party. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree that Draft:Tobey C. Moss Gallery listing artists who had shows there does not contribute to notability (doubly so if not referenced). Notability is not contagious. Focus on content and refs that are about the contribution of the gallery to the California art community. David notMD (talk) 10:13, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

New Volunteer

 Johanahyoung99 (talk) 11:16, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome! Do you have any questions about editing Wikipedia? --David Biddulph (talk) 12:02, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Email Sending

How do I send an email using my wikipedia account. Thanks, Jwale2 (talk) 12:11, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Jwale2, if the user you want to email has allowed it in their user-settings, you'll find a link that says "Email this user" on the left side of their userpage, under "Tools". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:16, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @ Gråbergs Gråa Sång

Page move

Someone recently made a page move on Accuracy International AXMC, but in doing so, they moved the talk page into the Wikipedia mainspace. I tried moving it back to the talk mainspace myself, but I was unable to. Could someone move it to the talk mainspace for me? Loafiewa (talk) 13:29, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Loafiewa. I have made the move. It required an administrator. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:42, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I'd like to add a redirect or disambiguation page for Charley Kline

I learned about Charley Kline today, and tried searching for him on Wikipedia. Since I only heard his name and didn't know exactly how it was spelled, I was unable to find anything about him on Wikipedia. After going to a search engine I was able to find the correct spelling, and then a search here resulted in a few articles. I figure that a redirect makes sense since this is a search term, but reading Wikipedia:Redirect#Purposes of redirects I can't identify a primary topic (I skimmed WP:PRIMARYTOPIC). Adding a disambiguation page listing the (I count four) articles that mention Kline seems a bit odd.

So, I'm not sure what I should do. My gut instinct is to create a redirect to ARPANET#Initial four hosts, because the mention of Kline in Leonard Kleinrock is in a section about ARPANET. However, since I'm quite inexperienced on Wikipedia I don't trust my gut enough to be bold in this case. Firvqipo (talk) 13:04, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Firvqipo, welcome to the Teahouse. A disambiguation page is for different subjects with the same or similar name, not different articles mentioning the same subject. I would do nothing and just let searchers see the search results. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:56, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Firvqipo On the other hand, Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap. It's slightly disturbing that a search for Charley Kline in the search box suggests I'm looking for a contract killer, so I would be inclined to create a redirect for him.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:22, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I still don't understand why this submission regarding lacking of Corporate notability.

I need help... because I added all the links to the source, and this company has been in the industry for many years and has published music working with ASCAP. My friends have releases from this label and ranked #1 on the Billboard Dance music chart. PLEASE HELP! Would any information from Billboard or Billboard.com would be considered as not reliable? I worked in the music industry and Billboard is a reputable media publication.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:King_Street_Sounds 67.251.158.3 (talk) 15:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Please read the feedback regarding why the Draft submission was declined.

Just because artists of a record label have ranked high, does not make the record label itself notable. See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for more information about what makes a company notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia. Lectrician1 (talk) 15:17, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Vasileios Nektarios Sagonas

Hello,

I was wondering why is my draft being declined since the sources are reliable and completely third party and written by journalists. I am a fan of V-Sag and decided to write a new article using his full name as he is also a composer and collaborator on many projects. The sources clearly show how notable he is and a google search shows all kinds of releases on every platform. I will appreciate any kind of help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vasileios_Nektarios_Sagonas Renaki1983 (talk) 13:24, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:Vasileios Nektarios Sagonas has not been declined? You have not even submitted it for review. Theroadislong (talk) 13:30, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello Theroad, thank you for replying. You already commented that it wouldnt meet the criteria for NP. I am researching articles and citations and will submit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renaki1983 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I have read many interviews which I have the sources of the websites and are in Greek, or are interviews who he is admitting this information of his Early Life but I think it is not allowed to add the interview references? Can you please clean up information that should not be confirmed through interviews?

The interviews

http://www.gaylife.gr.com/proud-zontas-anichta-ke-perifana-os-lgbt-stin-ellada/ https://avmag.gr/31808/ο-v-sag-μιλάει-στο-antivirus/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renaki1983 (talk • contribs)

Interviews Draft:Vasileios Nektarios Sagonas

FYI

 – Section merged from below by Tenryuu.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vasileios_Nektarios_Sagonas I know details of his Early life from interviews such as http://www.gaylife.gr.com/proud-zontas-anichta-ke-perifana-os-lgbt-stin-ellada/ https://avmag.gr/31808/ο-v-sag-μιλάει-στο-antivirus/ but I understand we are not allowed to reference intreviews of the artist. Should I remove the early life details? And to add in detail: i do not know personally the artist, I am a fan, and I promised i would make a wikipedia page because he deserves it! thank you Thank you Renaki1983 (talk) 15:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Renaki1983. You are allowed to cite interviews, but only for uncontroversial factual data: see PRIMARY. The bulk of the sources should be independent.

Whether you know the artist or not, "I promised I would make a Wikipedia page because he deserves it" is a kind of conflict of interest. Saying "he deserves it" presupposes that a Wikipedia article is in some way for the benefit of its subject; but that is absolutely false. Of course the subjects of many articles do benefit from the article about them; but that is no part of Wikipedia's purpose (and the subjects of some articles certainly wish that the article did not exist, or said something different about them). Suppose you discovered something unpleasant about the artist - eg if a reliable source reported that he had a long-running feud with another artist? (I'm not suggesting this is the case: I know nothing about V-Sag; this is an example) As a fan, you would probably want to ignore that, but as a Wikipedia editor you should consider it dispassionately, and quite probably include it in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 16:22, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Subcat not working

I made the category Wikipedians who like Happy Tree Friends and added it to the categories Wikipedians by interest in an animated television series and Wikipedians by interest in a comedy television series, but it won't show up in either parent category, not even when I purge the page. Minkai (talk to me)_{(see where I screwed up)} 16:07, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

They did appear, JulieMinkai, but they were sorted under W. I have piped them, so they appear under H. --ColinFine (talk) 16:26, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Colin! Minkai (talk to me)_{(see where I screwed up)} 16:28, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet reporting

Do we need to inform the user prior to filing the report? Echo1Charlie (talk) 18:52, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Echo1Charlie: No. Depending on who the sockmaster is, it can be a bad idea to alert them – in any case, there is no requirement to inform them (before or after you have filed the report). --bonadea contributions talk 18:58, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you :) —Echo1Charlie (talk) 19:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

English editing software

Good afternoon Wikipedia editors and contributors.

Question: Is there any computer software that can be used to correct English grammar on Wikipedia ? Shumbamkay (talk) 13:53, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Shumbamkay Welcome to the Teahouse! Some people try to use software like Grammarly to 'fix' issues, without appreciating there is not always an issue that needs fixing! Across the globe we have many different ways of spelling and saying things in English, so the best way to resolve issues is to consider carefully whether an issue flagged up by a spelling or grammar checker in a browser is genuinely an issue, or not. If it's not - leave it alone. You might wish to read WP:ENGVAR to appreciate that we don't go around changing spellings or grammar to our preferred way of speaking if it already written in an acceptable form. We do however have our own tool (called WP:AWB) for making mass changes to typographical errors and such like. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors, which is a project that aims to improve the way encyclopaedic content is written here. I hope this helps a bit. Others may well chip in with their own thoughts on the subject. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Shumbamkay: As someone who's part of the GOCE, I wouldn't suggest using automated software to correct grammar, as there tends to be context that it tends to miss. As Nick Moyes pointed out above, if it's common typographical errors, then yes, bots like AWB can be helpful. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:13, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Bots using AWB do not run the AWB typo rules. Humans using AWB may use the AWB typo rules, and are expected to review the context of the recommended fixes before saving the changes. GoingBatty (talk) 17:33, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: In which case, it's probably better to just do it manually with the amount of scrutiny that should be given. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:02, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Shumbamkay: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos contains rules to fix typographical and grammatical mistakes. These rules can be used by AutoWikiBrowser, JavaScript Wiki Browser, WPCleaner, and wikEd. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Shumbamkay: Yes, absolutely! Good subject to bring up! Be suspicious of tools. English is a subtle language, and well-meant improvements in grammar/spelling/typography can often mess up its meaning. Here are a couple of recent examples I've spotted: (1) the article originally said X had banned pilgrimage and had done something about "those pilgrims who continued to visit the shrine". A good-faith editor converted this to "the pilgrims who...", which probably unbeknownst to them, completely changes the meaning. "Those pilgrims" means only those who chose to ignore the ban. "The pilgrims" makes no such restriction, and is only a comma away ("the pilgrims, who continued to visit the shrine") from meaning that all pilgrims decided to ignore the ban. One should always be super-suspicious of sentences that depend on the presence or absence of a comma; ambiguity and misunderstanding loom. The danger with little grammar-rewrites of this sort, is that each editor introduces a small change, creeping further and further from what the original reference said. It is a pernicious form of inaccuracy. (2) Another more drastic example was the (experienced) editor who changed an article about some fossil finds from ovid to ovoid, not realising that ovid is an obscure word for sheep-like. Ovoid made the sheep-things egg-shaped instead! That one was bot-suggested. So be careful with bots! They do not know context (how are they to guess whether a fossil is egg-shaped or a bit of a sheep?), and their ability to mimic human reading-processes is limited. People think of proof-reading/grammar as a simple form of editing, appropriate to those practising their skills. This is a misconception. Grammarly has it wrong: writing is quite easy compared to accurate proof-reading, because when you write your own text, you only have to know the rules that govern the expressions you use. When you edit someone else's, you need to know all the rules that they might know, and their readers. But don't let me put you off editing! Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 18:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Eats, Shoots & Leaves. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:22, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Shumbamkay I made a simple user script for fixing common typos listed at Wikipedia:Regextypofix - see User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/RETF. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:26, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Guidance on Challenging Sources

Hi! I was reading an article in the Guardian today and found a passage that was quoted in the article that the journalist stated was an exaggeration and contained inaccuracies.

Article: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/sep/28/steven-pinker-celebrity-scientist-at-the-centre-of-the-culture-wars

Text: “I laughed off my parents’ argument that if the government ever laid down its arms all hell would break loose. Our competing predictions were put to the test at 8am on 7 October 1969, when the Montreal police went on strike. By 11.20am, the first bank was robbed. By noon, most of the downtown stores were closed because of looting. Within a few more hours, taxi drivers burned down the garage of a limousine service that competed with them for airport customers, a rooftop sniper killed a provincial police officer, rioters broke into several hotels and restaurants, and a doctor slew a burglar in his suburban home.”

Pinker concludes: “This decisive empirical test left my politics in tatters (and offered a foretaste of life as a scientist).” But somewhat contrary to this tale of dark human instincts run riot, the Canadian historian Bryan Palmer told me that much of this violence was motivated by the political grievances of the Quebecer minority, and was targeted at Anglo businesses like the limousine service, which was given preferential treatment by the city government. The “sniper” was a security guard from the limousine service who fired a shotgun into a crowd."

This passage that the journalist is challenging is quoted on the Wikipedia page for the Murray-Hill Riots and is presented as fact. I don't like leaving inaccuracies hanging around, but I'm not sure if it's right to just edit the article once I've completed enough research to verify the journalist's assertion that Pinker is exaggerating/misremembering details.

Would appreciate some guidance on this.

Thanks! JBo1123 (talk) 19:52, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Personally, I think the whole statement should be removed as the details are covered in that section already. It's one first-hand account attempting to sum up the whole thing, and at the very least its placement in the text should not come before the chronology covered by the journalistic sources. Just my two cents. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 20:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Murray-Hill riot TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Best Practices for Editors with a Conflict of Interest

Hi friends! New Wikipedia user here. I've been asked by my employer to assist with improving our organization's article. I understand there's strong guidance around conflicts of interest, and am reviewing the COI guide. Can anyone offer best practices for collaborating with an article's editors? Thanks! EMI from CAM (talk) 19:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

EMI from CAM Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for asking. I have posted some information on your user talk page to review. You will need to make a formal declaration about being an employee. 331dot (talk) 19:40, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks 331dot! I disclosed my conflict of interest in my talk page, and the talk page for my employer's article (I'm employed by the Cincinnati Art Museum). Would you advise I take additional steps to formally declare my conflict of interest?--EMI from CAM (talk) 19:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

EMI from CAM Sorry, I missed that. That should suffice, but I might also make it on your user page(User:EMI from CAM). 331dot (talk) 19:48, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

EMI from CAM As you are employed in the GLAM sector there is a specific project for you, please see WP:GLAM. Unlike other paid editors, GLAM editors are actually very desirable contributors here. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:32, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@EMI from CAM: Since you have a COI, you should not be editing the article directly. Instead, you may post requests on the article talk page using the {{request edit}} template or use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 22:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@EMI from CAM I have left what I hope is a really supportive and encouraging reply on your talk page. I just wanted to add that it would be great if you used your WP:USERPAGE to say a little about yourself. It need not reveal anything that identifies you in the real world, but whenever I see a WP:REDLINKed username, it's natural to wonder how committed the person is to Wikipedia. Just a few words about your editing motivation would address that concern. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

How to remove NPOV?

I have corrected the neutrality dispute on my page. how do I remove this template. Clear instructions would greatly appreciated Pxmeza100 (talk) 02:48, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Based on your edits, the article you appear to be referring to is Mundo Meza. It does have a POV tag: "The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this template message)" First, it is an article, not your 'page', and anyone can edit it. Second, in my opinion your modest edits have not resolved the promotional tone, so you should not remove the NPOV tag. Ideally, you should continue to improve the article, then leave the tag decision to another editor. David notMD (talk) 03:03, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Pxmeza100: Are you calling the Mundo Meza article "my page" because you have some relationship with Mundo Meza? I see it's the only article you've edited, and noticed the similarity in your user name. If you have any conflict of interest, you must disclose it on your user page. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:28, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Image watermark

What measures should be taken against image with watermark, especially if they have a valid license tag? Echo1Charlie (talk) 02:28, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Echo1Charlie. My inclination would be to create a derivative version of the images that crops out or obscures the watermark, but the issue is complicated. Please read this advice about the legal implications. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:41, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your valuable advice. —Echo1Charlie (talk) 03:43, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Jeff Glassman and Draft:Lisa Fay

Hello, First, I love Wikipedia and this is not meant to be at all contentious. In 2006, an entry was made about me. I don't know where it came from, and I was flattered and thought it's a good thing. There were some factual errors, and didn't have some obvious footnotes. I tried to acquire enough knowledge to make the changes and eventually did, and I didn't feel right hiding who made the changes so I used my full name (Jeff Glassman) in the history. It's a stub I believe, and I didn't go into it any more and felt it wasn't for me to do. Recently, I tried to find out about how to generate a page for my collaborator Lisa Fay, so our representation in Wikipedia is balanced and fair, and reflects the amazing work Lisa has done, maybe a combined mention or page about the Lisa Fay and Jeff Glassman Duo and not about individuals only.

In the course of doing that, I started to get the impression that I shouldn't do it because I'm not detached. I dropped that project. Then this month I went back to it to see where it left off, and to find out what would be the correct way for a new page, a bio, to occur. When I did that, the draft (or whatever it was) was undeleted briefly, then deleted again, and then the old page bio on me was removed.

It's all right. I never felt entirely right having a page about me. And I especially didn't feel right having something prestigious, as Wikipedia is, about me and not about the person who is the collaborator for everything I've done, and more, artistically for 30 years now; that was not equitable. Since I don't know how it got there I was content to have it, and a little not content too. I would also be content to forget about it now that it's not there. But if it's a simple mistake, or a blip, or a confusion of my COI Lisa Fay idea with the page that's been there re: Jeff Glassman, I thought I would let you know or ask you if you know if it's correct that the old page is no longer.

There is a misunderstanding I think about the "unambiguous promotion" etc. I'm just not into that, thanks. Information yes. My very intentional life has always been along a different path, away from promotion self or otherwise, and pretty successful, also intentionally. It's a long story of small performing collectives, non-profit organization, political involvement, and risk-taking experimental work. That Wikipedia would remove that page referring to me because it looks like promotion, or self-promotion, is something I admire about Wikipedia. And trying to create something in Wikipedia has been quite an eye-opening experience into a hugely sophisticated cultural system of information democratization. I'm in awe.

Thanks, Jeff Glassman Bubby (talk) 09:04, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I can't say that I see "unambiguous promotion" in the deleted article. But perhaps I'm missing something. Pinging Athaenara, who deleted it. -- Hoary (talk) 09:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Both undeleted, tossing it back to you. – Athaenara ✉ 09:54, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) @Jeff Glassman: The general goal on Wikipedia is to have articles

1. on topics that are "notable" (in the Wikipedia-specific sense with lots and lots of history - for actors, the guidelines are at WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR, but in 99% of the time this means multiple reviews of their work by independent journalists, critics etc.),
2. written in a neutral point of view (NPOV).

The first criterion is about whether a topic ought to have an article, while the second is about whether the formulation of an article is correct. In other words, failing the second criterion can always be fixed by editing the article, but failing the first criterion cannot be fixed from within Wikipedia.

Looking at the undeleted pages, while I agree there are some significant NPOV issues, I do not think they rise to the level of pages that are exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedia articles, so I agree with the reversion of the speedy deletion.

We need to be on firm footing about the notability first. This Sante Fe New Mexican source is IMO the best source currently in the articles (well, I cannot read past the paywall but the preview looks promising) - got any others that are similar?

If notability is ensured, we can go about cleaning the NPOV issues. The recipe for this is to write as boringly (and precisely) as possible - more like a dishwasher user guide and less like a poem. For instance, [she] directs a vibrant ensemble of young artists with whom she originates socially contributive performance work. has a lot of value-laden words, but the bottom meaning could be either she directs the choir of school X or she directs the under-18 theater troup of city Y. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch, particularely its first section, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch § Puffery Victor Schmidt (talk) 10:56, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Jeff Glassman, I'm puzzled by "theatre artist" (whether "movement-based theatre artist" or other) and "composer of movement". Perhaps I can guess what each means (director? choreographer?), but having to depend on guesswork isn't satisfactory. -- Hoary (talk) 07:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I have concerns that the editors over at the Yom Kippur war are biased.

Multiple people have come with large amounts of sources/well structured arguments to change the outcome listed in the page, however, the editors, ScottishRadish, Hohum, and In-fid have all thrown this out of the window due to technicalities and never addressed the argument themselves, so therefore I request any sort of experienced Editors to look over the talk section of this page, because I think this violates multiple guidelines. Russavot (talk) 09:47, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Russavot Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please use the article talk page to detail your concerns and violations of guidelines. If that does not result in a consensus, you may then use dispute resolution. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

editing

I wanted to write something about Bush's presidency and on the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan I just wanted to number the casualties as well as I wanted to write about the shoe incident on what happened to Bush in his presidency. However I had it reverted due to the average wording and tone. How do I maintain my average wording and tone?  Unrememberedperson (talk) 13:38, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Unrememberedperson. The word was not "average", it was "neutral": a Wikipedia article may not be either pro or anti its subject in Wikipedia's voice. It may truthfully report what a cited reliable source says even if that source is partisan, but anything said in Wikipedia's voice should be something that both supporters and detractors of the subject should accept as true (even if they don't like it). See NPOV. If you want to make an edit that might be controversial (and manyt edits about contemporary politics and politicians come into that category), it's a good idea to discuss the edit on the article's talk page first. See BRD. --ColinFine (talk) 13:53, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiprojects?

What is a wikiproject, and how do I join one? Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 12:08, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

You'll find information at WP:WikiProject. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:26, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@David Biddulph: Thank you! Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 14:31, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Create my first Article - Need Help because it seems very complicated..

Hello, I want to create my first Article I cant even start because I already make so much mistakes with the Infobox.. Is there someone who can help me

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ilyas_Bircan&action=edit&redlink=1 Fußball1888 (talk) 05:09, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Fußball1888: As explained to you on your talk page, you should try editing existing articles before trying to create a new one. Article creation is very hard for beginners, so we want you to have experience with how Wikipedia works before you try creating brand new articles. Additionally, I suggest you to complete The Wikipedia Adventure, a beginner-friendly tutorial about how things work here. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 07:20, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: Fixed link to user's talk page. GoingBatty (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

read

 67.61.197.99 (talk) 14:30, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? --David Biddulph (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

How to create election maps for wikipedia

I'm wondering how I can make election maps like they appear on current wikipedia pages (ie 2020 New Jersey House elections). Is there a specifc service used to make these maps? Gordfather69 (talk) 20:04, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Gordfather69: This seems more of a general graphic design question. You might want to ask on the talk pages of those who upload images, such as User talk:Putitonamap98. The person who uploaded the NJ map you linked to has been blocked as a sock. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:46, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Gordfather69 There is no on-wiki tool for this but a free image editing software like GIMP is a good start. You may also find "blank" maps of the areas you want to discuss on Wikimedia Commons, for example File:NJ legislative districts (2001) Blank.svg is uncoloured and has been released into the public domain, so is a good starting template if you wish to colour it by result for a given election. You may be able to find other such images to work from, but remember to check that they are free to use for this purpose. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 15:04, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Adding tasks for HotArticlesBot

How should one go about creating new Hot Articles functions operated by the HotArticlesBot? The creator of this bot has retired from Wikipedia. Is there a forum where the attention of an editor with Wikipedia page-coding authorisations can be petitioned for assistance? Iskandar323 (talk) 06:58, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Iskandar323: - if a bot operator has retired, the question is whether or not the bot should be operating at all. I will raise this at WT:BAGWT:BON. Mjroots (talk) 07:51, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

It's a useful bot and seemingly pretty harmless. It doesn't edit mainspace - just counts edits. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:56, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Maybe, but there is a general principle here, needs discussion. Mjroots (talk) 08:03, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mjroots Note: moved from WT:BON to WP:BON ― Qwerfjkltalk 17:24, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Can someone add the new Solomon Partners logo to Solomon_Partners?

Can someone add the new Solomon Partners logo to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Partners? 68.173.155.160 (talk) 16:58, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Done. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:36, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Notability, Sources, Editing

I a have a couple of questions about Wikipedia's impact on notability. Since Wikipedia is ubiquitous it automatically gives notability. How can one restrict an article for lack of notability if it is not put out there to the world in order to be noted? From what I could gather on the guidelines for Wikipedia's notability are just good editorial guidelines everyone must follow. But notability is more than just editorial rules. How can I tell an article is notable if no-one else has covered it on Wikipedia? If the world would not be introduced to the first Apple computer how could Apple get to be notable. Notability is given by the consumer, integrity is given by the guidelines. Can editorial guidelines suck the life out of notability? Effectivenow (talk) 20:01, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Effectivenow Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have things backwards. Became the purpose of Wikipedia is to summarize what independent reliable sources say, it does not confer notability on a subject. Wikipedia is not the place to introduce a subject to the world. A subject must be written about by others unaffiliated with it in order for it to merit a Wikipedia article. If no independent sources write about a topic, it cannot be on Wikipedia. If you just want to tell the world about something, there are websites where you can do that, as well as social media. 331dot (talk) 20:06, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Wikipedia is an encyclopedia about already notable subjects. It is not within the scope of this project to make anything notable. What makes something notable enough for an article is that others have noticed it and published about the subject in reliable sources. So to answer your question, our guidelines do not give notability, only establish what we consider to be notable enough for an article based on what others have said and published. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 20:09, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

We arrive on the scene after the action is over. Apple make a computer. Someone else finds it exciting and writes about it. Then, after everyone else has got excited, finally Wikipedia notices the excitement, arrives at the scene, and summarises what everyone else has already written. May sound a bit dull, but that's what we are. Elemimele (talk) 20:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

What a brilliant summary of what we are about. Thank you, Elemimele. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:40, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for all the information and explanations I think I get it. Best Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Effectivenow (talk • contribs) 17:48, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Using rude/slang words and terms in edit summaries - @Ghmyrtle:

I have made some edits to some of the Cheshire East and Cheshire West and Chester articles by cutting down some of the leads from saying "Neston is a town in the unitary authority of Cheshire West and Chester and ceremonial county of Cheshire, England on the Wirral Peninsula" to "Neston is a town in the unitary authority of Cheshire West and Chester in Cheshire, England on the Wirral peninsula". But User:Ghmyrtle had appeared constructive in saying better before but then calls my edit on Chester ludicrous which means "so foolish, unreasonable, or out of place as to be amusing." and they using that in edit summaries means they have called my edit two things either unreasonable or foolish which would also call me foolish. I am insulted by that and if I am going to be given saracastic replies for my edits. Then that would fall under WP:Intimidate and that is uncalled for but then also when I have added to Wirrals articles I have been reverted by the same user for unconstructive edits but they appear to WP:Own the articles and if you revert them they also revert you like WP:Editwarring. So will someone on teahouse please clarify if potshots and passive-aggressive terms are even allowed on here? I have pinged the user involved in heading and mentioned it will be on teahouse the issue. I will not be bullied or intimidated by veteran editors because they think using terms like the one on Chester is acceptable and polite when it is not and their longevity on here for being allowed to say that to me and my contributions. DragonofBatley (talk) 00:37, 29 September 2021 (UTC) DragonofBatley (talk) 00:37, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@DragonofBatley: There's a process for discussing edit disagreements with others. If your edit is reverted, you can always ping the editor on the talk page to discuss. In this case, the edit summary you saw from Ghmyrtle appears to stem not just from that edit, but several others you've made to towns in Cheshire, most of which have been reverted. Since you can see from the editor's user page that he's created over 1,300 articles and has made over 118,000 edits, while that doesn't mean he's always right, he's familiar with the proper style and grammar. If an editor's contributions require others to fix them, I can see how someone might get frustrated and describe the edit as ludicrous. We appreciate that people want to contribute, but having skill with grammatically correct English is expected. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 01:25, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

While I agree with you on what you say. I at the same time have been on here for over a year and made some articles I'm not new to this. But at the same time I won't have my contributions rudely knocked because of someone with 118k edits and so. To me edits there mean nothing but to say I've been on here longer. I've made nearly 2000 edits not lots but wiki is about informing readers and keeping it to the point using unitary authority of and the ceremonial county of then England clogs up the lead. Trimming it to sound less crammed is better the. It being cluttered. Also I believe the user tries to WP:Own the Cheshire and Wirral articles which your not allowed to do and they've took issue with me over my contributions to Built up areas and questioning me and my contributions to them. I feel Wikipedia editors most of the time are out to get me. I really do.

@DragonofBatley:, "ludicrous" is not a slang word. It is a perfectly normal word, though certainly a forceful one. The word was not applied to you, but rather to your edits. It seems that there is a lot of controversy right now among Wikipedia editors about how to describe the current and historical counties of the United Kingdom. When people have strong feelings about these matters, there will be some rough and tumble interactions, but I do not think that this word crosses the line into incivility. If you believe that there has been edit warring, then Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring is the place to file a report. You should try to use proper grammar and write clearly. Your comments just above are a bit garbled. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:43, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen: I have autism and learning difficulties. So my grammar and writing will not always be spot on. I still think the way the user approached the edit summaries was rude and incivil. If I said that edit was "ridiculous and a stupid edit" then that would be seen as rude and likely intimidation. Ludicrous is just that foolish, unreasonable and out of place as being amusing". Ghmyrtle has had issues with me over my Wirral, Cheshire edits and some Built up area articles which they took onto the Wiki:geography project page early this year and assumed they were not notable but many said they were fine. Some got redirected but others did not. The point is I am on here to contribute not mocked. If I see any signs of feeling intimidated or bullied, I will raise the issue not because I am a telltale but because I am not going to be intimidated by veteran editors or those with years and edits behind them. Just because of longtivity and edits, it doesn't make them immune to issues other editors like myself feel. It's an encyclopedia not a it should sound like my version as mines better then yours site or a each article made is owned by me. I am not rude as sorts but I do become if other editors are rude to me DragonofBatley (talk) 01:51, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

In fact its twice now in the past month I have reported editors for intimidation on here and it has happened again. It's clear most editors involved with geography dislike me and my edits. When I am not a troll or a tick but I get seemingly accused of being one through how many editors speak to me. I might have had some spurts over my time but that's through what other editors have said to me in rudeness and I don't know how to edit or write an article properly that sounds like bullying to me?. DragonofBatley (talk) 01:54, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@DragonofBatley:, editors who have autism and learning difficulties are certainly welcome to edit Wikipedia, but they (which includes you) are not exempt from complying with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines, behavioral norms, and the basics of writing clear, coherent, comprehensible English prose with proper grammar. Minor errors are fine, I make them myself sometimes, and sometimes other people correct my errors but more commonly, I correct them myself. If you make major errors in your writing, expect to be reverted as this is both standard and commonplace on Wikipedia. So, before you click that blue "Publish changes" box, proofread your edits carefully. A lot of autistic people are very good at that. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I know I'm not exempt nor others with autism but I also don't expect to be spoken to rudely by the user mentioned like I was on the Chester page as said. In my eyes there was nothing wrong with simplifying it but I won't accept the old cliche of they have more edits then you and because of that they use it as a platform to WP:Own and call my edits foolish with words like ludicrous. That type of attitude in my eyes has no place on here but every time I call it out.

I'm told it is perfectly acceptable to use words like that but if I used words like stupid or ridiculous it be seen as intimidation. Can editors understand it from my perspective of feeling constantly like in a loop of I can't contribute without another editor having the final word like with articles on Wirral etc. I edit them and Ghmyrtle reverted them same with four of the Cheshire town and Chester articles. I was simplifying it but they choose to revert it to keep it clogging up the leads and when I revert it it becomes an edit war which I'm told I'm the one who can be seen as the problem but not the veteran editor involved. Normally that's been the stance by other editors those who have more edits and years can normally have the final word on edit warring but newbies like me cannot because we become a problem.

Why is that allowed? I've been in so many edit earrings or so called warrings but always told I could be blocked and not the other party involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DragonofBatley (talk • contribs) 03:40, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I apologise for upsetting DragonofBatley, but a wording like "Chester is a walled cathedral city in the unitary authority of Cheshire West and Chester, Cheshire, England, of which it is the county town of Cheshire" is simply not acceptable for an encyclopedia. "Ludicrous" may have been an overstatement made at the end of a busy day, but it was not intended to be rude on a personal level, and most certainly not "mocking" or "intimidating". Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:06, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ghmyrtle: thank you for apologizing. I don't like bringing issues up like that but it felt like an attack with using word like ludicrous but no worries thank you for apologizing I won't take it any further. I only added the edits to help trim the leads especially on Malpas and Neston were to just trim it from being clogged up with unitary authority and ceremonial county. It wasn't to change any meaning just to simplify it for readers and repetitiveness given Cheshire is now a historic county but it's no matter I'll leave the issue now thank you for apologizing Ghmyrtle I would apologize if I angered or offended someone myself. Thank you anyway matter resolved

• @DragonofBatley: If you consider the matter resolved after a small apology about the language used, good for you, however... Not two weeks ago, you ran into similar problems with an entirely different set of editors. I do not think anyone, you included, is looking forward doing the same merry-go-round of long-ish Teahouse posts in two weeks. Per Wikipedia:Don't_be_high-maintenance#Persecution_complex: If you find yourself frequently at noticeboards (especially as (...) the filer of complaints that don't get resolved the way you want), this is a clear indication that your approach is genuinely problematic.

If you could develop a strategy for dealing with such problems without consuming the time and attention of other editors, that would probably be great for everyone. (My advice is to stop caring too much about the language other editors use, but apparently that is not an option for you, so find your own way.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:27, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I hope you will take this in the spirit it is intended to improve the encyclopedia - and read Wikipedia:Competence is required. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:54, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Question pertaining Date of birth of BLP

Good day everyone. I want to ask, if there are no sources to verify the age of a subject, is it ok to continue the article without adding age? Or... If there are too many sources pointing out different age, what should be done in this case? Should the one with majority be used? Or what? Please enlighten me Idoghor Melody (talk) 10:43, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

It is fine to write an article about someone without including their age. Age isn't relevant to what a lot of people do. There is no reason why a notable person should necessarily want to tell everyone about their birthday. And a surprisingly large number of people don't even know their own age anyway, having been born in a time and place where birth certificates were not issued, and memories unreliable. Elemimele (talk) 12:19, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele: Thanks for your answer, but what about the other part of the question?? Talking about when there are different sources with different age. Ok let me generalize it, when there are different informations from reliable sources about same person, how do you do that? Same person but different answers from sources --Idoghor Melody (talk) 13:09, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I can only say what I would do, not what policy is. If the age of the person isn't important to what they are, then I would probably not bother including the information at all (why include potentially inaccurate data when the data are of no use?). If the information is vital to the person's life/notability etc. (e.g. they're a sportsman with a claim to be the youngest/oldest swimmer in the republic of Yorkshire or something) and has real value, then I think I'd include both dates with their sources, noting that the matter is disputed/uncertain. Obviously this wouldn't fit in an info-box, but if age is so critical to the person's notability, it'd be okay to do it in the article anyway. Elemimele (talk) 13:19, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele: Thank you very much for your time, I appreciate.--Idoghor Melody (talk) 13:23, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Idoghor Melody If several reliable sources differ on a subject's date of birth, best practice would be to omit it to avoid confusion; but it is possible to mention that there are conflicting reports and to cite those, especially if you feel the article may be prone to having one or the other readded by editors who have not seen the conflicting sources. Ida Galli is a possible example in practice of how to mention this; notice that the lead does not give a birth date and the body mentions that sources do not agree. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 15:11, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Grapple X: I understand it now, thank you very much for your time. --Idoghor Melody (talk) 18:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

What should the references be named in this article?

Started drafting an article - not sure what to name the references. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pixel_Worlds GREENPROCYON (talk) 17:56, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@GREENPROCYON: I assume you means the red notices. If so, the |title= param of {{cite web}} should generally contain the title of the webpage referenced in the |url= param, which is often (but doesn't need to be in some cases) what your browser displays in your tab selection bar for the particular tab. I have fixed those errors at this time, you can look here to see what I have changed. You will notice that I added a few extra parameters like a website name and an access date. This information is generally uefully to prevent link rot - should the ressource at the original location become unavailable, someone in future can use this information to find the ressource elsewhere, possibly in a web archive. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:13, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: Thank you for the help and info! GREENPROCYON (talk) 18:49, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

How do I create a table?

I'm trying to edit in my sandbox, trying to make an article for later (about MeowChat), but I don't know how to make a table. can anyone help me please? Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 11:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@ElectricGirl123 Please see Help:Table. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:27, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi ElectricGirl123. You can find some general information on tables at MOS:TABLE and Help:Table, but often a way to learn about such things is to find a table that you like that's already been added to some existing article, copy the syntax into your sandbox (be careful to hit "Cancel" and "Publish changes" when you copy the syntax from the existing article), and then play around with the syntax to find how changing one part of it might affect the table. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll and Marchjuly: Thank you both. I will try your suggestions. Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 11:36, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

• ElectricGirl123 If you have an idea of what you would like to include in a table I would be able to make a start on it for you so that you can then copy how it work for any further additions; they can be quite daunting at first but once you see how the first rows and columns work they get much easier to add to or to customise. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 14:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Grapple X: Thank you, I would love that! Go ahead. Electric Ask me a question, get answered in a ZAP! 18:59, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

ElectricGirl123. Sure, just let me know how many rows and columns you think you need and what you'd like them to say. I take it your sandbox is where you'd like it? 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 20:03, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Another help

Hi. I'm partial blocked from mainspace editing. But I want to remove a section from my created article. How can I do this. Emergency! Thanks! — Tajwar.thesuperman ^{Talk • Contributions} 14:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tajwar.thesuperman: I would assume since your blocked from the mainspace you can't edit talk pages, otherwise you could put in an edit request. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:35, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Blaze The Wolf, please do not assume such things because you are incorrect in this case. At present, this editor is blocked from article space but they are not blocked from talk pages. Administrators can tailor blocks quite narrowly if it is called for. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 15:40, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

My bad. I wasn't sure if talk pages were considered part of mainspace (although for whatever reason I thought they were even though they're technically part of the Talk space, hence all talk pages having Talk: in front of them)― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:42, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: See Help:Namespaces for a list of all the namespaces in use, each content namespace gets it's own talk namespace. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 20:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tajwar.thesuperman: Hi there! Are you able to use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard? GoingBatty (talk) 14:45, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf and @GoingBatty: Thank you for both! Yeah I'm able. And I've made a request. I'm partial blocked. So I'm feeling very sad! :( Thanks! — Tajwar.thesuperman ^{Talk • Contributions} 15:03, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tajwar.thesuperman: If you continue good behavior then you may be unblocked, but I'm not an admin so who knows. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:04, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: Yeah. I'm trying my best. I was very panicked and angry when I saw that I was blocked. So I couldn't control myself! But I hope, from now, I do good behaviour at my best. Thanks.— Tajwar.thesuperman ^{Talk • Contributions} 15:09, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tajwar.thesuperman and Blaze The Wolf: It's not so much about "good behaviour" (I don't see any evidence that Tajwar has ever behaved in a poor manner), it's about demonstrating that you understand copyright policy, and showing that you understand why what you were doing was a violation of copyright policy/law and that you won't make the same mistakes in the future. A good thing to do would be to help out at your Contributor copyright investigation - on that page there is a list of all the potentially problematic edits you've made. If you go through that list and label up edits you now know are copyright violations ("e.g. I made this page by translating content I copied from this website") that would both be a really good way of showing that you now understand what you can and cannot do and would really be appreciated by the people who are doing the clean-up effort. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 20:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Renaming names of pages that start as "List of Vietnamese people" or "list of people from Wyoming"

My pinch of salt would be that these articles titles are funny... like "look guys we have the complete of people from Wyoming" and so i wanted to ask is anyone one planning to change the names to "List of notable people from [location]" or is it an unspoken tradition on Wikipedia to name it like that itself . LostCitrationHunter (talk) 17:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@LostCitrationHunter: That's not a bad idea, however I don't really think that it's necessary. For example, while it was still in the discussion phase, List of Roblox games was originally proposed to be called "List of popular Roblox games". I don't actually remember the reasoning "popular" was dropped although you should be able to find that in the archive of the discussion at Talk:Roblox. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:36, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that'll happen, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (lists) advice against it. But guidelines can change if there's consensus, you can suggest it at that talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:40, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@LostCitrationHunter: This isn't done because the concept of "Notability" is a Wikipedia self-reference - it has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia that doesn't match up with normal day to day use of the word. To a lay person a list of "Notable" people might be expected to include every mayor, person mentioned in the news, minor politician etc, while what it means to editors is that the person meets one of Wikipedia's specific definitions for encyclopaedic notability. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 20:23, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Hi everybody! I've need a help that how can I found sockpuppet accounts? Thanks! — Tajwar.thesuperman ^{Talk • Contributions} 12:12, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry explains what sockpuppetry is, how to submit an investigation, and in an infobox, a link to a list of current cases. I hope that answers your question. David notMD (talk) 13:11, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tajwar.thesuperman: Depends upon what the socks are doing, if it's just vandalism or a known WP:LTA then just report them to WP:AIV with a reference to the sockmaster. If this is a more complex case or a case where a checkuser would be helpful then file a case at WP:SPI. Remember that you must provide evidence to back up your claims, ideally in the form of diffs, as unsubstantiated accusations of sock puppetry are seen as a personal attack. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 20:35, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

TELEPHONE RIGHTS:

COX COMMUNICATIONS disconnected my land line for not signing up for NO ROBO. No phone for months now. I sued them myself sighting the TCPA and still can't find an attorney. Anyone know of any case laws in California that prohibit telephone disconnection? Cox violated Public Utility rules, but I can't find anything for damages I might be entitled to even for freedom of speech. Does anyone know of any California laws or cases or something to show damages for wrongful disconnection of telephone? 66.27.52.142 (talk) 22:53, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, this page is for asking questions about using Wikipedia, it is not a general question asking forum. I can only suggest that you contact the relevant regulatory authority in California, or locate a qualified legal professional. 331dot (talk) 22:56, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

how to create post on wikipedia

Hello sir i am krishan ladoiya and i am blogger. and recently we start a free help support to get anyone help for blogging releted. we not charge any money. we just guide new blogger. so i was create a wikipedia page. but it's deleted can i ask how to create wikipedia page. Krishan Ladoiya Nohar (talk) 02:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Krishan Ladoiya Nohar. It's nice that you're tyring to hlp people start blogs, but it also sounds like you might be misunderstanding some things about Wikipedia. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for some general information. You might also want to look at Wikipedia:Alternative outlets because there may be better websites for you to try and do what you want to do that give you more freedom and control over the type of page you seem to want to create than Wikipedia will be able to offer you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Assistance with first template attempt

Hello Teahousers, I am attempting to create my first template. Below are the four pages in my sandbox, which were designed based on the coding of a similar existing template.

1. User:Hwy43/sandbox/Template:Alberta municipal codes (based off of Template:Alberta Municipal Officials Search)
2. User:Hwy43/sandbox/Template:Alberta municipal codes/accessdate (based off of Template:Alberta Municipal Officials Search/accessdate)
3. User:Hwy43/sandbox/Template:Alberta municipal codes/date (based off of Template:Alberta Municipal Officials Search/date)
4. User:Hwy43/sandbox/Template:Alberta municipal codes/doc (based off of Template:Alberta Municipal Officials Search/doc)

As can be seen on the first and fourth pages, the first four outputs aren't rendering properly (probably due to being in user space). Also, I don't know how to test to confirm the template works properly before moving the four pages over into Template space. Should I just be bold and move them over now or is there an alternate recommended path?

Please ping me with your reply! Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 03:13, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Hwy43. It's complicated to test interdependent template pages without saving them. You are allowed to create works in progress in template space. It's not reader facing like mainspace and doesn't appear in searches by default. I just suggest you don't add them to template categories before they at least work partially. If you make them in userspace then you have to use those names in transclusions until they are in template space, for example saying {{User:Hwy43/sandbox/Template:Alberta municipal codes}} instead of the non-existing {{Alberta municipal codes}} or {{AltaMC}}. You could also create redirects from template space to your user pages but then you may as well just create the actual templates in template space. By the way, I'm a little concerned that you have the template editor user right. I hope you only use it on things you understand well. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:47, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, PrimeHunter. I've made the moves and everything is working out as hoped. I got the template editor right some years ago mistakenly thinking it was a prerequisite to developing new templates. Shortly after being granted the right my contribution rate declined significantly, IIRC. I have no intent on using the right on protected templates until if and when I become proficient. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:40, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Talin Büyükkürkciyan

Hello,

Mostly in wikipedia I look for actors, directors or writers. I can see their movies one under the other and a general information above about these actors. Where are they from and so on. I'm a choreographer born in İstanbul and wanted to create a page for myself. First of all I don't know the template and how to put this work titles one under the other and give them links. Also If I understood correctly I can not create my own page and promote myself as you say but somebody else can do that instead of me?

In wikipedia if I can look for names I thought I can do that for myself. But is that correct?

Best,

Talin Talin Büyükkürkciyan (talk) 19:04, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Talin Büyükkürkciyan: It is very strongly discouraged for you to create an article about yourself. See WP:AUTO for advice/guidance. RudolfRed (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Talin Büyükkürkciyan, you say: If I understood correctly I can not create my own page and promote myself as you say but somebody else can do that instead of me. On promoting yourself, please see RudolfRed's comment above. On having somebody else promote you: No, nobody may promote anybody. -- Hoary (talk) 02:49, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Talin Büyükkürkciyan, just to make it super clear, there are people out there who will tell you that they can write an article for you at WP, and who will take payment for doing so. Most of them are utter scams, and none of them can promise you an article. Even if someone else writes an article about you, it will still be reviewed by other editors, and if they feel that you don't currently meet the criteria for notability (which are rather strict), the article will simply get deleted again; and if it looks too promotional, it will undoubtedly get cut back to bare facts. I'd urge you not to be tempted to pay for an article, as it will all end up going wrong. There are much better ways to get publicity, and there are an awful lot of very good up-and-coming creative people who do not (yet) have articles in WP. The articles come later! Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 06:08, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

REVIEWING ARTICLE BASED ON HEADING

I know that the work editors do is very demanding and we appreciate them. However I wish to ask if editors can help new writers by providing reviews for their article when declined based on the sections and areas that needs to be corrected. Because often than not; editors make general assessment statements which makes the revision seem difficult for new writers.

For example my article; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Gbaramatu_Kingdom

I was asked to remove peacock words and quote reliable sources and use formal tone. I did quoted sources and I have also seen where some articles don't have sources but they only included citation needed. So what I wanted further details on this query to help me do the required revisions for resubmission.

Thank you.

Thank you. Excellence360 (talk) 01:43, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

I'll look at one paragraph:

Gbaramatu Kingdom is a dominant Ijaw speaking ethnic tribe located in Warri South West Local Government Area of Delta State with history dated as far back as 1200 AD as the first settlers of the Escravos River.[note] I'm very surprised to see a "kingdom" explained as a "tribe". The people are known for their rich oil wealth and agitation for self-determination in response to the years of political and economic marginalization by the Federal Government of Nigeria towards the Ijaw Nation. "Wealth" does not have to be described as "rich"; instead, even if it's not qualified, "wealth" implies "a lot of it". First of the acts of such several responses was during the ‘1997 Warri Crisis’ as the people contended the decision of the siting of the headquarters of the Warri South-West Local Government Area to be Ogidigben under the late Gen. Sani Abacha. Following the success of the clamour of the people, the headquarters was relocated to Ogbe-Ijoh which is considered the rightful location seen the population of the Ijaw people and their share percentage of contribution to the nation’s treasury through their huge oil wealth. I'd say "The first of several such responses"; not "contended" but "contested"; not "the late Gen. Sani Abacha" but "Sani Abacha"; not "Following the success of the clamour of the people" but "They succeeded, and"; not "seen the population of" but "by"; not "share percentage" but either one of these two words; and not "huge oil wealth" but "oil wealth" (or, I'd guess, "oil earnings").

The first sentence is (or anyway appears to be) referenced. None of the subsequent sentences is referenced. Why should the reader (or reviewer) trust what it says? -- Hoary (talk) 06:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

change from unpaid to paid editor

I created an article for my employer and should be listed as a paid editor but I somehow screwed that up and I want to correct it. How do I go about it? Tomsapid (talk) 15:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Tomsapid Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are no other edits from your account other than this post; have you actually created your article yet? New users cannot directly create articles and need to use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft. This is a good idea for anyone inexperienced in creating articles, even if they could technically create one themselves.

To answer you, there are formal ways to declare a paid relationship(see WP:PAID) but a simple statment on your user page (User:Tomsapid) will suffice. Something like "I am Tomsapid and I have been paid by (name of employer) to edit on their behalf". 331dot (talk) 15:49, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm confused, I created the page Kinetic Exclusion Assay and submitted it for approval about a year ago. The page exists and I can sign in as tomsapid and edit the page (I made a couple of small changes early on) but there is no User:Tomsapid page that I can find. Do i need to create one? Thank you for your help on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomsapid (talk • contribs)

Tomsapid You created the account User:Tomofidabio on July 15, 2020. That account created the page that you describe, which is now at Kinetic exclusion assay as it was accepted. 331dot (talk) 16:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tomsapid: Please, on your user page, also list other accounts you have used. You shouldn't use them anymore but you should disclose them. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

331dot and Anachronist thank you both for your help, hopefully I am in compliance with wikipedia's rules now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomsapid (talk • contribs) 13:49, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tomsapid looks good to me, thanks! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 08:47, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

REVIEW OF ARTICLE "FARHAN WILAYAT"

Thank you so much for the invitation. I have been sharing small contributions on wikipedia for last few months. Recently, I have created a fresh article Farhan Wilayat. I would be so grateful if you please review it and share your precious guidelines. Dr Paul Harrison (talk) 07:28, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

In addition to my above query, I have another question please. I have added following external links as "evidences" of notable work done by that person. Please check and share your guidance.

• Live Report on Gusi Peace Prize & Water Projects on GNN TV Youtube video
• Live Report on Water Relief Projects on SAMAA News Youtube video
• Report on Pollution at Ravi Road on SAMAA News Youtube video
• Report on National Flag on Independence Day Youtube video
• Interview of Farhan Wilayat on Urdu Point DailyMotion video

Dr Paul Harrison, the article is now a draft, Draft:Farhan Wilayat. Youtube allows the publication of just about anything. It may in theory prohibit copyright violations, speciously reedited material, and so forth, but in practice it does not. Ditto for DailyMotion. Your use of any of these links as a reference should demonstrate that the video was uploaded by the copyright holder, that its content is presented without any conflict of interest (and therefore that it's neither by nor for your biographee), and that the content says what your text implies that it says. -- Hoary (talk) 08:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much Hoary for sharing the important guidelines. I shall learn more through experience of seniors like you. By the way, I have made necessary amendments and rectifications in the draft and have submitted it for review. Dr Paul Harrison (talk) 08:48, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Question about where to place references

One source for a biography says that the person was born in Copenhagen and came to Greenland shortly after the birth. Another source says that the person was born in 1972 and grew up in Qeqertarsuaq.

Should I write:

He was born in Copenhagen in 1972. Shortly after the birth he came to Greenland and grew up in Qeqertarsuaq.

or just:

He was born in Copenhagen in 1972. Shortly after the birth he came to Greenland and grew up in Qeqertarsuaq.

or should the references be placed otherwise? Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 05:57, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Dipsacus fullonum, references should follow the statements that they support, so I would prefer the former, despite its pedantic appearance. Maproom (talk) 07:03, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dipsacus. I have a slightly different stance from Maproom. There is nothing wrong with gathering the references for short paragraphs at the end of the paragraph, within reason. This is a matter of good editorial judgment, which is a precious commodity among Wikipedia editors. If the basic facts are uncontested and widely accepted, I would use the second format. If there is any confusion or controversy about the facts and you have selected truly reliable sources instead of poor quality sources that people might stumble into online, then I would use the first format. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Dipsacus I'd go with the second one. Mjroots (talk) 08:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

"Shortly after the birth" is a phrasing most often used to refer to the mother, not the child. I would suggest something more like "his family moved to Greenland while he was an infant. He grew up in Qeqertarsuaq." --Khajidha (talk) 18:04, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Maproom, Cullen328, Mjroots, and Khajidha: Thank you all for advice. You can now see the biography at Pele Broberg. I will follow the article to see how my possible mistakes are corrected. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 11:05, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

References

Help with the first post

 Courtesy link: Draft:Otnicka

Hello! My name is Valeria. I`m a new user of my favorite Wikipedia. I started with an article about my favorite artist. I spent a lot of time to find all possible information and made a draft. It was rejected. I have made changes and added more links to independent sources confirming the importance of the artist. I want to ask you to watch this recording and give me some tips. The entry is called "Otnicka".

Thank you in advance :) Valeryaplygavko (talk) 23:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Valeryaplygavko: There's quite a bit of work to be done on that draft. The one you should work on first is to find a reliable sources that show Otnicka is notable; that is, that there are significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject (WP:GNG). These sources should go in depth about Otnicka's life, like a newspaper story or a book, instead of just a simple listing on a chart. Speaking of charts, we don't care about charts by a single retailer; see WP:CHARTS for ones that Wikipedia considers suitable. Remove mentions his songs are on a platform (Spotify, Apple Music, etc) since that's generally not considered encyclopedic information to be on Wikipedia. Lastly, it looks like English is not your native language. While we welcome anybody to edit Wikipedia, competence is required, and we expect contributors to have a certain degree of English ability. You might have an easier time contributing at a language that you're familiar with. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 23:52, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby:

Thank you for your clarifications. They are very useful! Yes, you are right, English is not my native language, but I persistently study it :) Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valeryaplygavko (talk • contribs) 00:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Valeryaplygavko: Welcome to the Teahouse! Which of the 12 notability criteria for musicians at WP:MUSICBIO does Otnicka meet? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 00:45, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Small distnction, but your draft was Declined, not Rejected (worse). David notMD (talk) 03:24, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

• Valeryaplygavko—WP:A/S is a list of sources used by the various music projects here which have been deemed reliable; if you want to search for "Otnicka" in any of these websites. It would help show notability if you can find some articles about him there, maybe something discussing new releases or tours, or an interview with him. It's a good page to remember if you plan to write about music in the future since it makes finding sources much easier. Hope this helps. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 11:49, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Valeryaplygavko and Grapple X: Note that interviews with him do not help demonstrate notability, since interviews are people talking about themselves. We need independent sources when writing articles. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:55, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Of the WP:MUSICBIO categories, the most suitable options are:

2.Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart. 5.Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable). 11.Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network. 12.Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or television network. I added links confirming rotation on a major radio station as well as being on the chart of this radio station. It is worth noting that the WP:COMPOSER category also suits him Because he is the author of famous world hits (at least 2). Why am I talking about world fame? At least 2 of his songs were seriously screwed up a year ago. Hundreds of millions of views (in total) on YouTube, as well as Instagram and the newfangled TikTok :) He is a modest guy and does not appear in the media. I just repeatedly saw questions related to interest in this person, including top Google queries, and nowhere is there clearly collected information about his biography. That's why I'm aiming to make an accessible article here. By the way, I saw a comment on my topic that I should at least delete all links related to iTunes and Spotify. I'll do it now.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Valeryaplygavko (talk

@Grapple X: Thank you so much for your link with the sites to check. This is really valuable information.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Valeryaplygavko (talk

Cap badge on The Royal Regiment of Scotland page

Good Afternoon. On our page the image is of an old cap badge. Who can i contact to get this updated with the correct one.

Regards

Gillian Duffy 84.51.142.242 (talk) 14:41, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Royal Regiment of Scotland. David notMD (talk) 15:17, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Can you provide a website reference that there is a new cap badge? This site https://www.army.mod.uk/who-we-are/corps-regiments-and-units/infantry/royal-regiment-of-scotland/ appears to be identical to what is at the Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 15:24, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

The cap badge on the website you have stated is the correct one. On the crown there should be 5 pips and the one on our wiki page only has 3 (the old badge). Will you be able to change the image for us please ? Regards Gillian Duffy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.51.142.242 (talk) 11:43, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done I have uploaded the image from the website, with a fair-use rationale and added it to the article today. Note that such uploads are tricky owing to the copyright restrictions but I hope I've done it correctly and the file will not be removed by the Admins! David notMD, I'd be grateful if you could check at the file location Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:45, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Looks good, but I am not well versed in Commons issues. David notMD (talk) 18:53, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: It's a fair use image, so it's in enwiki, not Commons. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help. Regards Gillian Duffy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.51.142.242 (talk) 14:19, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Edit Problem

Why my edit is not appearing in google it's up to date? James Bond7350 (talk) 14:24, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@James Bond7350: Wikipedia has no control over what does and doesn't appear on Google. Google controls what appears on Google. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

It takes time for Google to index articles, including updates. 331dot (talk) 14:54, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Need help editing page

Hi, Would it be possible to have someone review the page I wrote? I'm new to Wikipedia and would love to have an experienced editor give me some guidance. Alexsumas (talk) 14:57, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Alexsumas: Welcome to the Teahouse! I presume you're referring to Draft:Jeff Brown (grocer). When you feel that you have adequately addressed the feedback you received, click the "Resubmit" button to request that an experienced editor review your draft again. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:04, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Much of the information comes from Jeff Brown's own website, Brown's Chefs Market, or else his personal LinkedIn, Facebook or Instagram posts. Wikipedia only wants to know what others think of him. You must use information found through newspaper and magazine articles that are not press releases written by Jeff Brown's employees, or other sources that are not coming directly from Jeff Brown and his businesses. The one exception is that you can use Jeff Brown's sites to obtain statistics such as his birthdate, or that he's married. But you must use sources not connected to him to list his awards, or his public service.

Go through your references, remove all that are directly connected to Jeff Brown, and keep only the newspaper articles and independent organizations. Rewrite your draft using those sources, with very limited use of personal sites for his birthdate and other bits of public information. Wikipedia only considers a person notable if those not connected to him believes him to be notable. Best wishes on your next draft that comes from independent sources. Karenthewriter (talk) 15:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

I have added my mvno to the wiki page for the uk

Hi all, it I’ve been told it may have to be removed due to verification. All the details are factual who can I talk to to prove all the details to allow it to stay up.

Sorry new to Wikipedia 83.100.219.169 (talk) 16:21, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry, I have no idea what your mvno is, or which article you added it to; but if you are wanting to add anything related to yourself to Wikipedia, that is a conflict of interest, and you should make an edit request rather than adding it yourself (see those links for more information). Also note that everything in a Wikipedia article should be verifiable from a reliable published source - personal knowledge is not enough. If you can find a reliable published source (such as a major newspaper, or a book from a reputable publisher) the information can stay, but otherwise it should not. --ColinFine (talk) 16:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

List of United Kingdom mobile virtual network operators, perhaps? Another editor has apparently been doing some commendable cleanup work on it over the last month, removing many unsourced/non-notable entries. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 16:52, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Image upright not working

I'm testing a military person infobox. The image I wanted is far too big, but neither the image_upright nor image_size parameter will work. User:JulieMinkai/sandbox II: Daggerfall Minkai (talk to me)_{(see where I screwed up)} 17:08, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

JulieMinkai, GAH! That was quite the jumpscare. The reason why it wasn't working was due to there being additional coding screwing with the infobox, namely the brackets and the alt text paramater. By that, I mean I made this change the extra stuff. That additional code is for putting images in the image body (see this example article, and infoboxes only need the file name ("File:Image name here") to get kicking. Hope this helps! Panini!^🥪 17:18, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Original Name Of The Philippine Islands

 NaturesOwnMan (talk) 17:11, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

There may be some info at History of the Philippines (900–1565) RudolfRed (talk) 17:21, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

What's the right thing to do, when an article could refer to a different subject (needs a hatnote), but the other subject has no article?

The example in mind is the Protector_lock, which article describes Alfred Hobbs' lock. There was, however, another lock also called "Protector" made by Theodore Kromer in Germany. Confusion is likely because both locks are amongst the best ever made, both were regarded for a time as the pinnacle of unpickability, and both are of considerable historical interest. Ideally, someone would write an article about Kromer and his work, but I lack the expertise. Nevertheless, it'd be a good idea if Hobbs' article mentioned the existence of the other. Is it okay to add a hatnote when there is no destination to point to? Or just a sentence at the start of the lead ("May also refer to...")? Elemimele (talk) 20:02, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele: It's inappropriate to "add a hatnote when there is no destination to point to" (see WP:NOARTICLE). I'd probably, for the time being, add a one-sentence paragraph to the end of the article, saying that that the name "Protector" was also used by Kromer. Deor (talk) 22:36, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Deor: thank you for the guidance, I've done it as suggested. Elemimele (talk) 06:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Elemimele, you've added the sentence before the article lede (a bit like a hatnote), which I don't think fits with Wikipedia's manual of style. Deor's suggestion was to add it at the end of the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:28, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry:, sorry, yes, I'll shift it straight away. If I get a chance, I'll try to find some better references. If I can convince myself that there are good references out there, it might be worth starting at least a stub article for Kromer's protector locks. Elemimele (talk) 12:57, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Just in case anyone's following this still, I wrote a new article, but it got declined for being too short, with the suggestion that the new material be incorporated into the existing article on Hobbs' protector lock, as a separate section. This I have done, although it feels a bit like hijacking the old article. It was obviously necessary to add a sentence at the top, explaining that the term "protector lock" happens to apply to two items, and that's why this is now a two-in-one article. So it hasn't worked out quite as I'd envisaged: the answer, as per AfC, seems to be stick it all together and then you don't need two anyway. But the main thing is, the information is there. Elemimele (talk) 17:22, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

how to create a page

 Omairaleem (talk) 14:53, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Omairaleem: Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. I suggest you first work on improving existing articles - see Help:Introduction and WP:The Wikipedia Adventure to get started. When you're ready to try to create an article, there is a lot of great information on Help:Your first article. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:57, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Omairaleem (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating a new article (not just a "page") is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. If you dive right in without knowledge and experience, you risk coming away with disappointment, frustration, and hurt feelings as things you don't understand happen to something you worked hours on. I would advise you to spend time editing existing articles first, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. You should also use the new user tutorial.

Once you are ready, you may create and submit a draft using Articles for creation. 331dot (talk) 14:59, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Omairaleem: Note that you're not allowed to simply copy and paste material from other web sites, especially the subject's own site as you did at User:Omairaleem/sandbox‎. Are there independent sources (not associated with the Ahmadiyya community) which have written about that image library? If not, then it may be the case that it is simply not notable enough to merit an separate article here. --Finngall ^talk 17:58, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Citation

In the lead section of any article about a person we have to mention date of birth. My question is where should I put the citation for the date of birth; inside or outside the bracket. Which one of the following is correct.

1. Name (born DD MM YYYY)citation is...
2. Name (born DD MM YYYY^citation) is... Eevee01^(talk) 18:54, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

The first one is correct. Citations always go after any punctualtion, per MOS:CITEPUNCT.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:13, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Shantavira Thanks! Eevee01^(talk) 19:18, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Eevee01:@Shantavira: MOS:CITEPUNCT says, "Where a footnote applies only to material within parentheses, the ref tags belong just before the closing parenthesis" (my emphasis), from which one gathers that the second example, not the first, is correct. Deor (talk) 17:12, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Thak you Deor. I stand corrected.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:41, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

• In addition to the above, Eevee01:

1. Per MOS:BADDATE, do not use the dd-mm-yyyy format for dates (either spell out the month, or use yyyy-mm-dd)
2. Per WP:BLPPRIVACY, only give the precise date of birth if it is likely the subject does not object, otherwise give only the year (even if the source gives the full date). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 07:59, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

• Ideally this is something we shouldn't be citing in the lead for an article; anything in an article's lead section should also be present in the body of the article proper, and that's where we would cite it. So the lead might say "Foo (born Xth Julember, 19XX)" with no citation, and the article's body, perhaps in an "early life" or "biography" heading, or wherever it is natural, would also state "Foo was born on Xth Julember, 19XX.^[1]" which is where the citation would go. Deor is correct above in saying that the citation would go within the brackets, but in this instance it is not necessary. For examples of how this would look in practice, see Chris Carter (screenwriter)#Early life or Richard Nixon#Early life and education. Hope this helps. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 14:45, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

  Thank you! Eevee01^(talk) 18:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

How long does it normally take for a new article to be reviewed?

Just wanted to know generally speaking. I created an article a week ago an it's still unreviewed. Lupine453 (talk) 20:01, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Special:NewPagesFeed shows that there are just over 11300 articles awaiting review. Not many have been waiting more than 5 months. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:06, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Looking at your contributions, you have not submitted any drafts for review? Theroadislong (talk) 20:10, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

The OP is talking about an article (Lucie de la Falaise presumably), not a draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:19, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

• Lupine453—do you mean that Lucie de la Falaise is currently listed as "unassessed" quality? If so, you can assess an article yourself if you're confident in it, even if you wrote it yourself. Ideally you would want a second opinion for B-class and anything above that needs a review by others but you can judge that an article is a stub or start class article at any time. Wikipedia:Content assessment is a good place to get a sense of where an article might be at on the scale; my gut right now would say C-class is the best fit for this article as it needs some work on a lead section. You can ask at any wikiproject that an article belongs to if you want a second opinion, too. If you mean something else, then my bad. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 20:57, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

I think the OP meant that it is awaiting new pages patrol (& so of course it is NOINDEXed). If it hasn't been patrolled in 90 days the NOINDEX will be removed. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:06, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Notable Sources

 Courtesy link: Draft:J Dot Media, Inc.

Notable Sources

How many Notable sources needed for article ? Mosheh Levi (talk) 03:40, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mosheh Levi. You seem to be confusing the concepts of Notability and Reliability, which are different concepts on Wikipedia. Consider Der Stürmer and the Weekly World News, both of which are clearly notable enough to have Wikipedia articles, but utterly unreliable for use as sources on other Wikipedia articles. Consider instead a respected journal published by a local historical society for a century or more. That may well be a completely reliable source for content about that locality, but may not be notable enough for a Wikipedia article to be written about it. Cite only reliable sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:55, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Explained very well, Appreciated Cullen³²⁸, Do you Review Articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mosheh Levi (talk • contribs) 03:59, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mosheh Levi: I'm assuming this is about Draft:J Dot Media, Inc.? The rejection was completely correct. Our standards for inclusion for buisnesses are WP:GNG and WP:NORG both of which require the company to have been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. The key word with regards to your draft is significant - you're looking for things like newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, news websites etc where the author has put significant effort into researching and writing about the company. Things like database entries, business directories, online listings etc are considered to be routine coverage or trivial mentions, this kind of coverage exists for every company in existence and does not demonstrate why this company in particular qualifies for an article. Note also that the "independent" part means that material produced by the company itself (like press releases, sponsored content or their own website) do not count towards establishing notability. The genral rule is that you should be looking for at least THREE good quality, reliable sources to avoid deletion. To be honest, I don't think your company qualifies for an article yet. Finally your comments towards KylieTastic were completely unacceptable: making personal attacks towards other editors is going to result in you being blocked. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 04:52, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk) Did, I mentioned about specific draft ? or you were invited by someone to put your nose here? You do not even have courage to come from real name. go and get some life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mosheh Levi (talk • contribs) 06:47, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi, just another explanation of how things work: WP is a very collaborative environment, and people here don't generally feel that they need an invitation to get involved. We all work on it together, so if one person asks a question, or has an issue, everyone mucks in together to try to work out what the problem was, explain things, and make things better. Establishing notability of companies is a perennial, difficult and often emotive issue. The other thing is names: it's not obligatory for editors here to have an account. It's one of the many remarkably open features of WP. In fact it benefits us, because there are a lot of "IP editors" out there who only drop in occasionally, but have enormous experience in their fields. There are others who simply prefer not to have a registered account, or have never got round to making one. It's best not to make judgements on why someone has chosen not to use a registered account, because there are too many potential reasons: of course it also happens that people forget to log on before editing, which is no crime. And finally, just because an article gets declined now, it may not be the end! It may just be too soon: Wikipedia:Too_soon. Thank you, by the way, for declaring your CoI. That was a very correct thing to do, and I wish more people had that honesty. Elemimele (talk) 05:59, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mosheh Levi: I will add, your reply to the IP address was a personal attack, violating WP:NPA policy. Are you sure Wikipedia is the right place for you? You've been warned once politely by the IP address user above. Now you're being warned by me. Don't do that again. The IP address was spot-on in all the advice given to you regarding quality and quantity of sources. The assumption that you might be referring to your declined draft was a reasonable assumption given that your talk page and your contribution history are publicly available to anyone. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:01, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Mosheh Levi Back to the original question: the common answer is three reliable source references that have content of several paragraphs or more about the person or company, etc. Teahouse hosts often look at what the person posing a question is editing/creating to see if more advice can be offered. Your draft Draft:J Dot Media, Inc. has no refs that establish notability. Instead, it has (improperly formated) refs that confirm this very small, newish company exists. You attacked an editor here at Teahouse, and you questioned the expertise of the reviewer who declined the draft. You have been duly warned on your Talk page. Last, you resubmitted the draft without making any changes to remedy why it was declined. Expect it to be declined again, and if you persist in personal attacks, the draft Speedy deleted and your account indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 10:15, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

And now properly Rejected as having no potential to become an article. Because three employees and revenue under $100,000 is not notable. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Your threat here [5]] to "sue Wikipedia for misleading and hurting our reputation by its few automated fake authors" is likely to lead to a block. Theroadislong (talk) 19:30, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft Speedy deleted, creator indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 21:19, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Danny Peary

Hi. I'm still newish and I've run across a tag I dont think I've seen before. It's at Danny Peary, about the writer of cult film books. It says "This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed."

I verified a lot of the claims that didn't have footnotes, using inline citations. Other things I added "citation needed". I did remove one paragraph, as I said in my edit summary, that didn't say what it said RogerEbert.com did, and also didn't read like the rest of the article, so it looked like original research and I removed it.

What happens now? Do editors vote on whether it's OK to remove the tag? Do I tell somebody somewhere other than here? The Horror, The Horror (talk) 21:19, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

It looks like the tag was added here and an example claim given. If the article has subsequently had unsourced statements either verified with new citations, or removed, then it would be safe to remove the tag. However in this case there are still a lot of sections lacking sourcing; I wouldn't remove it now but there is no vote or anything necessary, you can use your judgement when you feel the sourcing has improved, but remember that another editor who sees it may disagree--if this happens you can discuss on the talk page for the article on where you disagree. Good work so far. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 21:28, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of the redundant account

Hi, I have a redundant account GarryGaller2, which I'm asking to delete:

I forgot my password to the original account, where I already started to work on the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GarryGaller

Now I registered a new account - GarryGaller2 via my email. I use the same IP. I restored access to my original 4 month old account GarryGaller and I don't want to keep a duplicate one - please, delete GarryGaller2:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GarryGaller2 --GarryGaller2 (talk) 21:07, 30 September 2021 (UTC) GarryGaller2 (talk) 21:07, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Accounts cannot be deleted, GarryGaller2. If you are not using the old account, just forget about it. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:11, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Garry! Unfortunately, stuff like that is difficult. Accounts cannot be merged or deleted, only renamed. You could look into usurping the old account name, but it might be more trouble than it's worth. Best, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:14, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Cullen³²⁸! I actually managed to restore my access to the old account, so I'm now using only it. I'm not going to use GarryGaller2 now. Is this ok?--GarryGaller (talk) 21:23, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

That is fine. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:37, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

What exactly is the "sandbox" section. How do we best utilize this feature? ForTheCultureMPC (talk) 21:15, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

ForTheCultureMPC—The sandbox, and any user page you create as your own sandbox, is there for test edits or works in progress. If you want to experiment with how to use wiki markup, or more advanced features like tables or templates, it's a safe environment to do so without risking something going wrong on a "real" article. Think of it like a practice space. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 21:18, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Grapple X: Thank you! That makes sense. Inappreciate you for the quick answer.

ForTheCultureMPC (talk) 21:26, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Be aware that while a search outside or inside Wikipedia will not find content in your Sandbox, anyone can call up your past Contributions, and from there, see what is in your Sandbox now, or even what you have deleted in the past. David notMD (talk) 21:27, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@ForTheCultureMPC: See also Wikipedia:About the sandbox. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:40, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Merging Drafts

I started a draft Draft talk:Knifepoint Horror and someone else interested in the podcast noted that someone else already started a draft in their sandbox. Should the draft be merged to the sandbox or the sandbox merged to the draft? TipsyElephant (talk) 16:36, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello TipsyElephant! The difference between a sandbox and a draft is how long they will last; drafts are temporary with the intention of moving them into the mainspace. Sandboxes act the same way, but the sandbox page itself doesn't disappear when the article is published, only blanked so the specific user can use it over and over again. Sandboxes last forever, while drafts will be deleted about 6 months after inactivity. With this in mind, I would move the content from the sandbox over to your current draft. Panini!^🥪 16:51, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: If you move content from Spiceislandseabird's sandbox to your draft, be sure to attribute it properly (see WP:COPYWITHIN). It would also be polite to ask Spiceislandseabird first. Deor (talk) 21:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

How do I proceed when I have doubts on feedback?

I am working on my first draft.

I did this paper as part of studying pharmacology 101 and found it fascinating so I wanted to gather the information in one place. Since the sourced information is not only from US articles, books, online news channels as well as Asian, I thought one succinct page would be helpful for others who are searching the subject.

I am finding feedback confusing. I find some of the feedback is specific and helpful and those I have addressed. Some are contradicting other feedback. Some are assumptions-no specificity to editorial guidelines, some seem to be opinions-no specifics.

I asked questions on specificity of the feedback, and got more information for which I am very grateful.

When I address specific points and correct them, I don't know what happens next. If they are corrected or a point clarified are comments supposed to updated to say that it was addressed.

Any feedback on this I'd appreciate. Effectivenow (talk) 18:37, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

This query appears to be about Draft:Jennifer Robi. It has been declined once and several editors have left comments at the draft and on your Talks page (me included). You are free to revise and resubmit. Leave in place the Decline and the Comments. If a revised version is approved, the approving reviewer will remove all that. David notMD (talk) 19:03, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Effectivenow. I assume that this is about what used to be called Draft:Jennifer Robi From Athlete to Wheelchair. Your draft is an advocacy piece that does not comply with the Neutral point of view which is one of Wikipedia's core content policies. I see no reason for an encyclopedia to have an article about one (or two) people who claim that they had an adverse reaction to Gardasil, which has been administered to hundreds of millions of people. Please read another policy, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, which states that "Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda, advertising and showcasing. This applies to usernames, articles, drafts, categories, files, talk page discussions, templates, and user pages. Therefore, content hosted in Wikipedia is not for: Advocacy, propaganda, or recruitment of any kind: commercial, political, scientific, religious, national, sports-related, or otherwise." This is why your draft is unacceptable because it is essentially a lengthy argument that Gardasil is bad. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I have cut large amounts of content from the draft that in my opinion were not relevant to Jennifer Robi. However, I still am of the opinion that this draft does not have the potential to become an article. David notMD (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Even after David notMD's work, very little of the draft's content is about its purported subject. Suggestion to Effectivenow: start by deciding what your draft aims to be about: a drug, or the drug testing process, or a lawsuit, or whatever. Then write about that, using an appropriate title. Sure, if you were writing for a tabloid newspaper, you'd start with a picture of a woman in a wheelchair, to get the reader's sympathy and interest. But that's not how Wikipedia should work. Maproom (talk) 07:46, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks this is helpful! Maproom. My next question: Where can I see this new draft?

I recommend abandoning this effort and creating a Litigation subsection under the Adverse effects section in the Gardasil article. David notMD (talk) 10:05, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very helpful as well. My next question: What kind of references are accepted? And how can I know news media channels, publishing companies etc that are accepted as well?

If you have specific sources in mind and are not sure if they are considered reliable, you can use the reliable sources noticeboard to check. Use the search field there to see if someone has asked about your source before, and if not, you can bring it up and get a second opinion on it. Hope this helps. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 22:05, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to all. I will re-think how to write about this not well covered subject. Since it is my first draft I think it goes with the territory. I will consider all information and talk to some of you once I have a better draft. I will use all your suggestions. I guess is right that I had large portions not connected to the legal case because that was not the main point although now I recognize the title gave this impression. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Effectivenow (talk • contribs) 21:50, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Where to find help on foreign language sources

Hello! I found a source that is in Chinese while looking for sources for my draft and I want to make sure what I'm seeing is as accurate as possible. I've used a machine translation from deepL and there's just a few things I need to check before I use the source. Is there a place where I can ask for someone who understands Chinese to translate the source for me and clarify something (or a few things)? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 22:15, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: You could check if one of the editors on this list is active and willing to help: Wikipedia:Translators_available#Chinese-to-English RudolfRed (talk) 22:19, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

CropTool

Hello. When I try to crop an image on Commons, I get this message. "500 Curl error: SSL certificate problem: certificate has expired". Paul Vaurie (talk) 01:13, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Commons isn't Wikipedia, Paul Vaurie. You should ask there. Indeed, Ooligan has already done so, so just wait and see what responses they get there. -- Hoary (talk) 02:16, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

When will Malaysia pass the 30,000 dollar per capita?

When will Malaysia pass the 30,000 dollar per capita?  Malaysia United (talk) 02:24, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Malaysia United. The Wikipedia Teahouse is a place for asking questions about Wikipedia, but it's not a really a good place to ask general questions related to other subjects. You might have better luck asking this at the Wikipedia:Reference desk instead of the Teahouse. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:42, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I know. I am sorry. I don't know how to delete this.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Malaysia United (talk • contribs) 02:44, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

No need to apologize and no need to delete this. It will eventually be archived; so, you need do nothing more. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:53, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malaysia United (talk • contribs) 02:55, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Reference of content

I would like to contribute to the article "Dol Said".But my reference is my school's physical textbook.What should I put at the reference section? Foreveralegend (talk) 00:47, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Use visual editor, click the Reference button, then press on Manual and add from there. Gyan.Know (talk) 01:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Clearly it's not physics, and it's not phys ed either. By "physical textbook", Foreveralegend, do you mean one that's printed on paper? If so, citing such artifacts is normal. But when you say "my school's physical textbook", do you mean one that's produced by the school and only available to people there? If so, then no, it can't be cited. -- Hoary (talk) 02:10, 1 October 2021 (UTC

I am going to assume for the sake of discussion that this is a widely published textbook rather than something that one individual high school cooked up. Foreveralegend textbooks of this type are tertiary sources which can be used for limited purposes. If you want to cite a textbook, use Template: Cite book and provide complete bibliographic details, and be prepared to defend your use of a high school textbook source. Is there a better source available for the assertion that you want to make? If not, why not? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:15, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

FAQ

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) § FAQ Template in Greek Wikipedia

The removing process of Techyan's links

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § The removing process of Techyan's links

SWP's "Suspended Waste Products

Using Solid Waste not demonising A New Future 2 parts to the question 1. 18 months of home research (not clinical) has confirmed for me the world should be "Working with Waste" to make building products instead of or relive the continually harvesting natural resources. 2.if pressure comes from the WMI corporate entities, corporate natural resource harvesters or other industries will my information be removed? Brief Gradually I have been processing, Testing & Improving the test result of SWP's to now be at an end of my capacity to advance the project without more & broad up to date clinical knowledge. I'm not sure if this is the purpose of wikipedia, but I'm grateful for what I have learned.

kind regards

Michael

Hello, The Old Fello. Anything that you have discovered through 18 months of home research is pretty much a textbook example of No original research, which is not allowed due to a non-negotiable core content policy. No experienced Wikipedia editor cares in the slightest about random input by corporate entities unless clear evidence of conflict of interest editing is presented. But if those entities make policy based arguments, then that will be given consideration equal to yours. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

To whom can I ask for auditing?

There is a dispute between an administrator and an editor, actually me, in a local wiki. The other administrator does not want to take part in this matter. What can I do? To whom can I ask for auditing? P0rnytail (talk) 04:09, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

That, P0rnytail, is a matter that you should take up with whoever runs your "local wiki". -- Hoary (talk) 04:32, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

P0rnytail, the Teahouse is only for answering questions about editing the English Wikipedia. There are hundreds of other language Wikipedias and thousands of other unaffiliated websites based on MediaWiki software. You need to use the help resources at the specific wiki where you are having problems. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:27, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Cullen328 I know I should solve in local wiki. But the dispute is between an adminstrator and an editor. I doubted there will be biased. So I want to know to whom I can ask for auditing in this condition. If you know it, please let me know. P0rnytail (talk) 06:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

P0rnytail, I already answered your question once but I will answer it one more time for clarity. English Wikipedia editors cannot possibly help you with any dispute on any other wiki. You must seek out the help resources on that specific wiki, not here. Do you understand now? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:27, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

OK. P0rnytail (talk) 06:34, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

How to delete an article?

 Malaysia United (talk) 07:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Malaysia United Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are several ways to work for the deletion of an article, depending on the situation. We can give you a better answer if you provide more information, as I assume something specific prompted this question, but the most common way is Articles for Deletion which invovles starting a discussion. There are other ways for more clear cut, specific criteria. 331dot (talk) 07:41, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Malaysia United Depends on situation, see WP:XFD. Basically, admins can delete articles, and non-admins can suggest deletions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:42, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

How to see a old question in Teahouse

I've asked a question some days ago in Teahouse, but it was old and got replaced by other questions. How do I see the answer for those questions again (since I haven't read the answers)? H0MARUP (talk) 13:55, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@H0MARUP: Hello H0MARUP! Conversations in the Teahouse are automatically archived once they get old enough.You can access the archives... somehow (i can't seem to find the place where the archives are). ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@H0MARUP: Hi there! At the top of this page, under the Contents, is a section called "Most recent archives". You can click on "1125" to go to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1125, where you can find the questions you asked earlier this month that have been archived. You can also use the search bar in the "Most recent archives" box to search for your user name to find all the questions you have asked or answered. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:05, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Which reminds me to finally ask this question: I get reminded on my talkpage if and when Teahouse-topics get archived and where to find them. I don't remember how to get this feature. But maybe it would be helpful to @H0MARUP:? --Maresa63 ^Talk 14:18, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@Maresa63: The talk page messages were posted by Muninnbot, which has not run since March.

@Tigraan: Do you have plans to restart the bot? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 14:38, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping GoingBatty. I did not turn it off voluntarily, so it should have kept running... I will try to investigate this weekend. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 07:44, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

What to do?

Wikipedia covers a lot of topics, but is far from complete. What topics have you found that need the most workto be comprehensive? 169.229.156.142 (talk) 19:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP! This is a really great question. There are many topics that require a decent amount of effort to make them into decent articles. If you're wanting to help out then I would first suggest creating an account as IP addresses are dynamic and are often associated with vandalism due to IPs usually being behind vandalism (but not all IPs are bad), however if you want to remain as an IP that is fine. There are many places that can direct you to articles that need some attention. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:28, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

That's a fascinating question. This answer may not be your cup of tea, but you asked what I think needs most work! I think Maths. The problem with Wikipedia's maths articles is that most of them are useful to only about 0.001% of humanity. Of our readers, 0.01% learn nothing because they already know what the article is trying to say; 99.989% learn nothing because they haven't the foggiest idea what the article is trying to say; and the magic 0.001% are the tiny few who happen to have the correct background and have forgotten a little detail of which the WP article can remind them. Most of WP's maths pages are actually an opportunity for their authors to feel smug, but little else. I wish I knew the solution to this. The problem is that WP is not a textbook, it's a tertiary source, so those brave enough to write maths articles are put in a bit of a dilemma; they are working with secondary sources that are often quite difficult to understand, and they're obliged to condense the material still further. If they expand to make it comprehensible, they risk being accused of original research, and textbookery. I almost wish there were a Children's Wikipedia analogous to the educational tomes available to our parents and grandparents (come back, Arthur Mee, we still need you), where editors of highly technical material had license to make it comprehensible - I suspect it would attract a lot of adult attention. What happens in practice is that most mathematicians able to explain their subject write about it in sites other than Wikipedia.

But to give you a more useful answer: technological cover seems mixed and variable. I'd like to see more Things articles to balance all the People articles. At times, WP looks like a directory of Footballers, Bollywood films and actresses. Elemimele (talk) 20:22, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Actually @Elemimele: there is a Simple English Wikipedia but its math articles are not much improvement upon this-here ENWP. Jim.henderson (talk) 02:53, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Jim.henderson: thanks for that, I didn't know. I just had a look; its page on eigenvalues and eigenvectors for example is quite good. Elemimele (talk) 07:48, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

And moths. Lots and lots of moths. I click "Random article" and boom, it's moth. There are almost as many moth stubs on Wikipedia as there are on my bathroom windowsill. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 20:31, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

@IP—Personally I think the best place to work towards comprehensiveness is to look at Category:Stub categories. Stubs are our smallest and least worked-on articles, the ones missing the most information. Knowing that an article is a stub basically means that we know we're missing information on it because the article is there, but mostly empty. You can see from each category there how many pages are contained within it (so, at a glance, there are 530 articles on 16th century painting which need a lot of work, and maybe this is a field that interests you or which you would enjoy delving into. And if not, there are almost 18,000 types of stub so somewhere in there might be exactly what you enjoy. Good luck with anything you do try. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 20:49, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

I'd suggest choosing a WikiProject that you have some interest in: you'll probably find a list of articles that people have identified as needing work. --ColinFine (talk) 21:28, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

There are six million articles, around six million of which can be improved significantly, and millions which haven't been written yet. If you want to contribute content then I suggest focusing on topics you know about and have an interest in, not what somebody says needs improvement. You don't get paid so you better find something you like writing about. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:19, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

• Have a look at this: WP:RA. Gyan.Know (talk) 04:30, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I want to agree with PrimeHunter here and add a bit of my own perspective. I understand that there is no way under the sun that I can have a significant impact on six plus million articles. I do believe that I can have a positive impact over time on 500 or 1000 articles and I rely on other editors like me to help improve the rest. So, I do not select the articles that I work on based on somebody else's type of pseudo-objective standards of what type of articles ought to be improved. I have eclectic interests and choose to work on specific articles that appeal to me in my own idiosyncratic way. I cannot fully explain why a certain topic engages my attention, but it does, and therefore I freely choose to write about those topics, in accordance with our Policies and guidelines. Being a productive Wikipedia editor is not a "job" where a "boss" assigns you to solve a problem. If you consistently improve articles on notable topics, then you can call yourself a productive editor, and have no apologies to make to any other editor. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:53, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

National law enforcement agencies of New Zealand

Hi there, Would it be appropriate to add the New Zealand Military Police (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corps_of_Royal_New_Zealand_Military_Police) to this page? They are a law enforcement agency with jurisdiction all over New Zealand.

Thanks for your assistance.

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:National_law_enforcement_agencies_of_New_Zealand Oliverbsimpson (talk) 12:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Oliverbsimpson, this is of course counterintuitive, but the method of adding an article to a category is to add the category to the article. Go to Corps of Royal New Zealand Military Police; within this, go to "External links"; edit this (even though what you want to add is an internal link), adding "[[Category:National law enforcement agencies of New Zealand]]"; save. -- Hoary (talk) 12:51, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Hoary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oliverbsimpson (talk • contribs) 08:21, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

How can I report a page

I want to report a page for Speedy Deletion or at very least for Afd. I just don't know how to do it. Please help me through it. This article is what I'm talking about. 2021 Gujarat local elections Gyan.Know (talk) 08:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Gyan.Know It was moved to draft space(please see the discussion above) for improvement. 331dot (talk) 08:30, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Please see WP:CSD for information on marking an article for speedy deletion, which can only be done if the specific listed criteria are met. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank You ☺️ Gyan.Know (talk) 10:54, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm lost

Anyone who would take a single look at my user page will know I'm very much into Esports. So my query is, there a page for Requested Articles related to Video Games and Esports. If yes, GIVE ME THE LINK! HAHAHA!!

jk but I Seriously need to know  Gyan.Know (talk) 11:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Gyan.Know: The area of requested articles in which to place your ideas is at WP:Requested_articles/Arts_and_entertainment#Recreation_and_hobbies. However, as you will see from the dates on some requests, you could be waiting for a long time. My advice would instead be to start a draft showing why the article you have in mind might be notable, using the articles for creation process. Also read H:YFA if this is the first time you've tried to create an article, which can be a frustrating process. Mike Turnbull (talk)

I can't see article created by me on search engine. Topic is Gujarat 2021 elections

I created an article related to gujarat 2021 election to civic bodies but I can't see it in google. I have added every single thing in a well organised manner in that article. Here is the link of article plz check. 2021 Gujarat local elections  Technology17896272923142 (talk) 08:02, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Technology17896272923142 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It takes time for search engines to index new articles, and that will only happen once the article is marked as formally reviewed by a new pages patroller, or after a period of time(30 days I think). 331dot (talk) 08:07, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

90 days. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:19, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I have moved it to draft space here Draft:2021 Gujarat local elections it is very poorly sourced. Theroadislong (talk) 08:27, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Technology17896272923142: While you are waiting for the draft to be reviewed, you may continue working on it (e.g. fixing the |last=/|first= parameters in references #1, #6, #7, #8). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Query about submitting an article

I put my article under 'contribution' and clicked 'publish'. Now does this mean, the article is submitted for review ? Or are there further steps to submit an article for review? Gmtl2021 (talk) 11:20, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Gmtl2021 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You edited your user page, which is not article space, but a place to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor. This is why title leads off with "User:". New users cannot directly create articles, and must use Articles for creation. The "publish changes" button should be interpreted to mean simply "save changes", it does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia".

It looks like you are attempting to write about yourself, while not forbidden, it is strongly discouraged, please see the autobiography policy. Your text appears to be your resume, this will not be accepted as an article. Any article about you should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about you, showing how you meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Wikipedia has no interest in what someone wants to say about themselves. 331dot (talk) 11:26, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

=== https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Gmtl2021&oldid=1027799089 ===

I want to move my contribution in URL mentioned in title, to 'Draft' for submission for review. Can someone move this please for submission for review ?

Mythili Gmtl2021 (talk) 11:45, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Explicit has deleted it. This is an encyclopedia, not a place for posting CVs. -- Hoary (talk) 12:44, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

You have now created and submitted Draft:20th century Indian Economists. The title is a misnomer, as the draft is about one person: Ulaganathan Sankar. The submission was declined, as it is not properly formatted or referenced. See reviewers comments. Also see Help:Referencing for beginners and WP:YFA. David notMD (talk) 13:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

...and the draft has now also been deleted as unambiguous advertising or promotion! @Gmtl2021: you really ought to give up on creating this article in its current form. Neiltonks (talk) 14:38, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Help me with my Draft

I had created the page for Global Esports which is now moved here: Draft:Global Esports. I am having a hard time figuring out what to add on the page to make it eligible as a page. Please help guys.  Gyan.Know (talk) 17:00, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Also can any reviewer or any person with ample authority clarify, in simple words, why this draft is not sufficient for to be an article. Gyan.Know (talk) 17:05, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Gyan.Know, and welcome to the Teahouse. The majority of the references in Draft:Global Esports are not independent of the subject: they are based on interviews or press releases. Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 17:47, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Gyan.Know - It was moved from article space to draft space by User:Hatchens as not ready to be in article space. So the first reviewer to ask would be User:Hatchens. (They are likely to agree with User:ColinFine.) Robert McClenon (talk) 19:45, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine Ok, so if, now these websites (sources already on draft) prove the page's notability? I understand how many of them are interviews. So can I use sources like Sportskeeda, AFK Gaming, etc. as proper non-interview sources. Will not be removing the original sources, buy add these as well. 01:37, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

No, Gyan.Know, non-independent sources do not contribute in any way to establishing that the subject (not the article) is notable. A source such as Sportskeeda may or may not be reliable, but independence is generally a property of the particular article or webpage, not of the publication or site. For example, the same newspaper website may contain researched articles by its reporters (probably reliable and independent), articles based on press releases (probably reliable, but not independent) and guest blogs (not reliable unless they are by recognised experts in their particular area). You probably want to replace most of the interview sources, rather than leave them: non-independent sources can only be used for certain kinds of information (see PRIMARY), and if the information in question is also in an independent source, then it adds nothing to keep a second, weaker, source. Also, reviewers choose what submitted drafts they want to work on, and a draft with a large number of probably weak sources is not attractive to them, as they will have to wade through the long list trying to find the few references that are strong. --ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

ColinFine thank you for suming it all up in one. It will really help me a lot. GyanKnow _{contributions?} 15:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Continuation of #Draft review above

No no it's not problem, I know it's 1 in 1 million drafts but I just got tired of writing it and would be very happy if my job would be accepted. I have no closeness to the actor as I told you. Thank you Roskau (talk) 14:31, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Roskau: I think you replied to the wrong place. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:32, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

OK, Roskau. When you reply, please reply in the appropriate section, and not at the bottom of the page, where your contribution gets absorbed into another discussion. --ColinFine (talk) 15:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Your draft has been submitted, and within days to weeks will be reviewed (system is not a queue). Either Declined or accepted. Given that you are suspected of having a connection to Peter - which you have denied, above - you should state on your Talk page that you have not connection to Peter, i.e., do not know him personally, nor are being paid to create an article about him. David notMD (talk) 16:07, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Right to Repair vs Right to Repair for Electronics

Draft:Right to Repair covers a lot of topics currently not covered by Electronics right to repair, some of them have no place in Electronics Right to repair. I have created therefor a new article and submitted it to the draft space just to see it rejected within minutes declaring it a rewrite (which it is not) telling me to instead add content to Electronics right to repair, which I would love, after finishing building the general article. Fthobe (talk) 11:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

You need to discuss this with @Theroadislong:, but it would certainly be unhelpful to put a lot of information about motor-cars in the article on electronics, so there is a dilemma. My impression is that the whole article-acceptance procedure in English WP is currently a horrible mess. Articles sent to AfC are likely to languish for months, possibly to the point where they never appear at all. Meanwhile the new-articles patrol is fighting a losing battle with enormous numbers of very-low-quality articles on completely un-notable individuals supported by non-English references (which must be checked, because things don't have to be English to be valid, but which makes checking a far harder job), and are perhaps a bit trigger-happy from time to time as a result?? One possible option would be to add your information to the article that @Theroadislong suggests, but rename (move) it to become a general article rather than restricted to electronics. I'm not sure this is the right thing to do, but it's in keeping with the suggestion you received. Elemimele (talk) 12:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Theroadislong:, what do you think about @Elemimele: suggestion? It's feasible for me. I would move Electronics Right to Repair back to my userspace and start working on a clear concept of having both articles side by side, one for general history of the topic and the other one as a detailled analysis of the electronics aspect. Fthobe (talk) 12:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes that sounds feasible. Theroadislong (talk) 12:28, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Looking at the content of the article and draft, I think the more logical split would not be general vs. electronics, but rather worldwide vs. US legislation. (Of course, talk is cheap, and I am not volunteering to actually write those articles, so...) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tigraan:, funny, we had the same thought: the reason why I did not do it was due to a plan to a plan to summarize legislation and efforts later on and branch the content out to single articles including a map chart. But that's some weeks down the road for me :) I would like to get a first version online to have also maybe other users participating in the project of mapping right to repair :) Fthobe (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele The process is backlogged because of not enough volunteers doing it (or too many people submitting articles), but it has been significantly more horrible than currently: Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation#Article submissions. Not too long ago, the Afc-people made a huge effort and got the backlog to zero, but it has grown again. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:06, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation#Backlog_at_~6_weeks. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång, thank you for your kind explanation. I feel a bit mean with what I wrote above. I feel rather sorry for those who volunteer for checking new article submissions as it is a thankless task; it's one of those roles where those doing it are more likely to get berated for rejecting than thanked for accepting, and must need quite thick skins. At the moment I'm far too inexperienced to help, but maybe when I'm older(still) and wiser... Elemimele (talk) 16:14, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikilink font color

Hello! I'm currently trying to make a userbox for people who use Opera GX to edit. I've copied a userbox for someone who uses Opera since it fit what I was trying to do, however I"m trying to change the font color of the wikilink to Opera (Will become Opera GX) from the dark blue to a brighter color that will show up better with the black userbox background. Anyone know how to do this? ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:15, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: use the following markup:

[[WP:example|<span style="color:#51aeff;">example</span>]]

Where the number after the color is the hex code of the colour you want to use. The example code I gave produces example 192.76.8.74 (talk) 16:20, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Alright thank you! ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Use <span style="color:#000000">text</span> to change the text colour, where the 000000 is whatever hex colour you want; if you use a pipe link and place the formatting after the pipe it should work with link text too; like this. 𝄠ʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ꭗ 16:21, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello

Hello my George Price I'm a New Member of WikiPedia Gng1999 (talk) 16:21, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Gng1999: Welcome to WIkipedia Gng! Did you have a question to ask about editing/using Wikipedia? Teahouse is the right place to do so for a newcomer like you if so. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Resubmitting Article

I have made edits and resubmitted an article. How can I be sure the page is actually resubmitted? The preview of the page shows only that the article is resubmitted but the information I created for the actual page does not show. Is this normal? The title of the resubmission also says Draft:Charlie Handsome (new section) but I was not creating a new section, just adding more resources for the article to be submitted. Any advice? CharlieV.Music (talk) 16:25, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft is at Draft:Charlie Handsome. Does not show that it has been resubmitted yet. David notMD (talk) 16:31, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@CharlieV.Music: The big pink template at the top of Draft:Charlie Handsome has a blue "Resubmit" button. When you click the button, there will be a big yellow template on the draft. Most of the references you use are Genius lyrics, which do not demonstrate notability. I suggest you provide more independent sources before resubmitting, especially for each quote and for the information in the "Early life" section. There is also quite a bit of non-neutral language, such as "Charlie skillfully blends a variety of musical influences", "mastermind", and "He has also used his talents to provide sound platters". If you have any conflict of interest, please declare it on your user page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:41, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Copyright concern

Hi all I think the Shipston on Stour page has a copyrighted photo here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shipston-on-Stour#/media/File%3AShipstonTownCenter.jpg

The author claims it's their own work but judging by their lack of contributions and linking the website. They have copyrighted a photo that fails WP:FAIRUSE. DragonofBatley (talk) 18:13, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Foxglovesi - list of user @Foxglovesi: contributions with using watermarked images.

It appears to be both a copyright violation and probably spam (trying to get the name of their computer repair business into articles) I'll tag them as copyvios on commons. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 18:20, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Contribution Project

hello i am currently running a Project, which counts User's Contributions on daily basis, The Project works on several wikis such as (ckbwiki, SimpleWiki, ksWiki, ArWiki, jawiki) it works by checks User's Contributions and comparing it to previous Contribution, Ranking Top User's Accordingly, if a user is less active than before The Comparison will change to Red otherwise Green, it also Shows User Rights along with their contributions,
i need someone's Help, to make a bot Specially for the Project, cuz i am doing it Manually by myself and it takes so much time and energy, Can anyone help me to make a script for, i really appreciate it. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 18:08, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Sakura emad: Hi there! The place to request bots is Wikipedia:Bot requests. GoingBatty (talk) 19:21, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty so it means i can request my project to be adopted by one of the bots on there right? —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 19:24, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

@Sakura emad: It means you can post your request at Wikipedia:Bot requests to see if any bot operators would be willing to help you. GoingBatty (talk) 19:29, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

that's great thank you. —— 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 19:42, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Supercentenarian articles

I would like to know why the supercentenarian ages show the number of years and days rather than just the number of years like in other articles (ex: in Kane Tanaka's article it says age 118 years, 272 days rather than age 118). Is there a guideline somewhere that says that their ages must be in that format? I appreciate your help. Interstellarity (talk) 18:18, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't know of any MOS guideline about that. The problem with having to update that number every day seems obvious. Are there many other examples of this? Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 19:28, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

It's updated automatically by the template {{age in years and days}}. According to the tool at [6] it is used on 3308 pages. RudolfRed (talk) 19:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't think we have an MOS guideline for this. I suppose it depends really on "is the number of days important?". On supercentenarian articles where you can have dozens of people with the same age in years then it makes sense to have a day count as a way of differentiating and ordering them. On biographies of people notable for longevity the exact age they were when they died is important information as it is the main reason they are notable. On most other biographies the exact number of days a person has been alive is (IMO) trivial information. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 19:48, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft review

Hello, Can you review my draft please. Roskau (talk) 06:12, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Roskau I assume that you are talking about Draft:Peter Behn. That looks to me like the work of an editor who has a conflict of interest or an editor who is paid for their edits. But I could be wrong. Please declare your connection, if any, with Peter Behn. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I removed the unnecessary information in my draft, I believe it is ready now. Roskau (talk) 07:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Roskau Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have submitted your draft and it is pending. 331dot (talk) 07:59, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

re Draft:Peter Behn please address the possible conflict of interest. Theroadislong (talk) 08:29, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Thought a small role, the character Thumper and the movie Bambi (1942) are cultural icons. Ahhh. -- Hoary (talk) 09:07, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry but I don't have conflict of interest. The information I removed I found on the internet, I have no closeness or acquaintance with the actor. Really! Roskau (talk) 08:37, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry but I don't have conflicts of interest. The information I removed I found on the internet, I have no closeness or acquaintance with the actor. Really. So I wish to accept my draft. Roskau (talk) 08:40, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I have moved your (double) comment. Please respond immediately below whatever it is that you're responding to. -- Hoary (talk) 09:10, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

As the sole reference for Behn's paternal grandfather Henry was German and his paternal grandmother Maren was Danish. His family lived in Arizona and Greenwich, Connecticut. Behn was educated at Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusettss, where he was a member of the school's swim team. After graduating, he went on to attend Yale University and serve two years in the United States Army., Roskau, you present Katie Fallon's book Vulture. Unfortunately I don't have a copy at hand. However, I note that the blurb for it at Amazon suggests that it's all about vultures. I don't understand why a book about vultures would supply biographical details for anyone, let alone a non-ornithologist. What am I overlooking here? -- Hoary (talk) 09:21, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I cut stuff and moved a quote. More can be cut from the Personal life and education content. David notMD (talk) 09:45, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes you are right, it was my mistake forgive me, I deleted it. I just added another source of information from where I got the data as well. I hope you accept this article please because it is important. Roskau (talk) 09:45, 1 October 2021 (UTC) I have moved this message from where it was apparently misplaced, in the section #Can someone monitor this user below. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Roskau, and welcome to the Teahouse. I wonder why you say "it is important", because to me it looks like a draft about one of thousands and thousands of actors, who may or may not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. The draft doesn't suggest why he, or an article about him, are important If it's important to you personally for some reason, then I would say that you have a conflict of interest - maybe not the usual kind, of being connected with the subject, but in that you have a personal purpose which is different from Wikipedia's and may or may not be compatible with it. --ColinFine (talk) 13:26, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Note: I presume ColinFine meant to link to WP:NACTOR. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:38, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

I got those quotes from IMDb, you can check it, I hope you accept my job. I just want to contribute at Wikipedia, to have more articles. That is, I love this job. To create articles for famous people who do not have one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roskau (talk • contribs) 19:50, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Roskau, IMDb is not a reliable source. -- Hoary (talk) 22:02, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Can I add PepPlugs?

I would like to add the term PepPlugs to Wikipedia. PepPlugs is Personal Ear Protection Plugs and refers to a variety of earplugs used for "plugging ears" and blocking out unwanted noise. PepPlugs addition 2603:3004:27:A700:9899:E3CF:864E:98DF (talk) 23:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. We already have an article Earplug. Mentioning one of many brands is not appropriate, as it is considered promotional. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:16, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Removal of Citation

I am not trying to spam or my intentions are not bad. I just want to learn about adding value able content as well as I learned that external links are not totally banned in Wikipedia so I want to learn the right way to do so. I would be very thankful if you could help me with the same. Can you please share reasons why my citation was not approved, why my link not getting approved as I can see several external links on Wikipedia, is there any part of page that allows external links if yes please tell, what should be the right strategy for a citation? Adeel Faraz Khan (talk) 17:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Adeel Faraz Khan Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You attempted to add a citation to your own blog. This is a severe conflict of interest- and even if it were not, blogs are almost never considered to be reliable sources, and as such are not appropriate article content. You say you don't wish to spam, but linking to your own blog will only be seen as spamming by other editors. 331dot (talk) 18:07, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

You have been indef blocked, perhaps a bit too fast, but there is a chance that you can successfully petition to be unblocked if you promise to never attempt to cite or External link yourself again. David notMD (talk) 00:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

How to use twinkle

I am using the Wikipedia app on iOS, how can I use twinkle? I have it turned on in gadgets, but i'm not sure how to access the features. Anomalocaris Is Cool (talk) 00:08, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

@Anomalocaris Is Cool: You can't, to put it bluntly. Twinkle is only compatible with the desktop web site and only really displays properly if you use the default skin. If you open a web browser, scroll down to the bottom of the page and click on the "desktop view" link, then sign into your account the twinkle functions should be accessible in the row of tabs along the top of the page. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 02:43, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

I want to question a word in Spanish in the Wiki article of the song "La Paloma".

The word is "sino" vs "si no" in the translation of the words in the song "La Paloma" in the Wiki article. The word (it seems) should be the former, meaning the very opposite of the "si no" shown in the text. I need someone with a native language if they agree, and submit if I am correct.. 50.39.115.145 (talk) 05:59, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: La Paloma.   This source has "Si no". Maproom (talk) 07:51, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Solving a conflict between WP:HYPHEN and WP:COMMONNAME

There is an ongoing move request in Natural-language generation#Requested move 27 September_2021 and it seems that MOS:HYPHEN and WP:COMMONNAME are in conflict: The hyphenated (as per MOS) version of the term does not appear to be used outside of Wikipedia, with effectively all of the relevant scientific field preferring the unhyphenated form of the term. How should a conflict like this be solved?

For what it's worth, the article title used the unhyphenated term from 2003 to 2018, when it was moved to the hyphenated form by a single editor without discussion. Ljleppan (talk) 07:55, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Question about edit summaries

Hello, I'm a new editor on Wikipedia and while browsing Wikipedia's policy I found the "Teahouse" where I can ask questions. I saw some edit summaries being signed with "ce" or "re" - what do those mean? Thanks for understanding! Aequilaterum (talk) 07:55, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Most probably "copyedit" and "reply"/"response". --bonadea contributions talk 08:09, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome! There's an Edit Summary Legend at WP:ESL. ce means copy edit and re means reply. ClaudineChionh (talk) 08:09, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

new page submission declined

I have added enough reliable references but the page is declined. Could you please look into my page?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Choo_Mandhirakaali Annam Medias (talk) 04:27, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, Annam Medias, and welcome to the Teahouse! Hopefully someone will be along to answer your question soon, but I'd like to comment that you'd probably have better luck on the talk page of your article's reviewer, which you can find here. They'll probably know the ins and outs of your case a bit better, as well as the guarantee that they understand some of the language in the sources. They'll probably ask you to provide your reliable sources—a good rule of thumb is that you'll need at least two (but probably three) sources that are reliable, independent of the subject, and cover the subject in-depth. I hope you can find what you're looking for! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 06:01, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Also talk page of the reviewer, who appears to have knowledge of Malayalam films. David notMD (talk) 10:58, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Problem with Inserting a URL where the url itself contains a ] character.

{{subst:trim|1= Advice requested on adding an external link URL to a page. (btw I'm new to wiki markup and editing, so pls be kind and helpful - we've all been learners) I'm trying to put an external link to allow direct entry to view a public data page on BOLD4 taxon ID database. I know the url of the destination page. but there's a problem:

If I use syntax [URL thensaywhatIwanttoappear], the problem occurs when the actual url contains square brackets []. eg: https\\www.fredbloggs\org\butterflyname[tax] ...will fail because of the ] in the url. see:

• [[https\\www.fredbloggs\org\butterflyname[tax] thisiswhatIwantutolookat]
• Ooops.

the first "]" interferes with the syntax and terminates the expression. So what appears on published page is a mistyped link, and text saying

• [tax thisiswhatIwantutolookat]

Erm. See what I mean?

I don't know any other way of expressing the taxon in the db query, eg numerical taxon ID to avoid getting a [tax] in the db query url. So any wiki workaround would be great..?

Thanks. }} Mothylator (talk) 23:03, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Check out the article at Percent-encoding. You need to replace the special characters with their % encoding. For example, replace [ with %5B and ] with %5D. RudolfRed (talk) 23:36, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Additionally, read the guidance at WP:EL for when or when not to include external links. RudolfRed (talk) 23:37, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mothylator. See Help:URL#Fixing links with unsupported characters. There are six errors in [[https\\www.fredbloggs\org\butterflyname[tax] thisiswhatIwantutolookat]. The correct code (if the page existed) is [https://www.fredbloggs.org/butterflyname%5Btax%5D thisiswhatIwantutolookat] to produce thisiswhatIwantutolookat PrimeHunter (talk) 23:45, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Perfect thank you RudolfRed & PrimeHunter

Resolved

Mothylator (talk) 11:37, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Advice needed on article split

We could use some guidance at Talk:Amusement Today#Splitting the article from any experienced editors familiar with lists and naming guidelines to weigh in on the best course of action here. I think we're on the right track but would appreciate any additional insight. Thanks in advance! -- GoneIn60 (talk) 12:35, 2 October 2021 (UTC)