Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1233

Archive 1230

Archive 1231

Archive 1232

Archive 1233

Archive 1234

My article has been Blocked for using a wrong Username

Hi My name is Tom Henderson (TomH300). I quite innocently made an error when I wrote my article on Vectar Project, by using the name Vectar project. I was asked to login as a new user (tomH300) and I now find that the page is still blocked. Can you please help TomH300 TomH300 (talk) 08:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

No, TomH300, there's no block. The draft remained at User:Vectar Project/sandbox. I've just now moved it from there to Draft:Vectar Project; you're free to work on it there. Happy editing! -- Hoary (talk) 09:10, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help, Tom TomH300 (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

See the note on your talk page about undisclosed paid editing. You must respond to that before you make any more edits anywhere. Bear in mind that if you are an employee of Vectar Project, or a consultant and they're your client, you are considered a paid editor even they aren't paying you specifically to edit Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Academic Subject Capitalisation?

Hi everyone,

I've been looking at the entry for Edwina Currie. In the section on her early life her entry claims that she studied for a degree in "Philosophy, politics and economics". Should politics and economics be capitalised? I don't want to "correct" it and annoy people.

Kind regards, Puffin123 (talk) 13:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Puffin123 That degree at Oxford is usually referred to by the acronym PPE but Wikipedia's article on it is titled in sentence case, so I would leave it alone. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:47, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Politics and economics are common nouns, and would not normally be capitalized. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:19, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

If that's correct, why is "Philosophy" capitalised? It appears mid-sentence. AndyJones (talk) 12:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@AndyJones Now corrected to "p". Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Notability for a musician

Hello, I submitted a draft Draft:Waltteri Väyrynen to AfC for a musician of my favorite band, a prominent progressive metal band. I thought I had established notability through the inclusion of several reputable, independent, non-trival sources, but the draft was rejected for Notability. However, the musician and at least 2 of the bands he was/is a member of satisfy most of the "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" in the Wikipedia Notabiltiy (music) article. I cited sources, and even did not list this musician as a member of a prominent band which he was a member of because I could find no reputable, independent sources. The argument could be made that the subject of this draft is an individual member of a prominent band, and may be more properly subject to a redirect. However, part of the reason I created this article was due to the release of "Future material". The frontman of the band releasing the material has cited this musician as a direct influence on the sound of the release, and this band's past 6 releases have charted in the Billboard top 100. People may be searching for information on this musician.

I am not affiliated with this musician or any of his projects in any way whatsoever. I am just a fan who noticed the drummer of my favorite band didn't have a page. I am very new to creating and editing articles on Wikipedia, mainly because I don't have anything to add. This is the first time I've had a chance to really contribute, and I'd like to be able to.

Would greatly appreciate any thoughts on next steps here. Thanks. Zymologist (talk) 17:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy pinging the reviewer, @Utopes: TheWikiToby (talk) 17:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Zymologist: Notability is not inherited from the band. Band members must have had significant coverage in independent, reliable sources that go in-depth about them specifically. Otherwise, they should be redirected to the band article. AfC reviewers expect the references to be in the draft in order to accept. Source 1 is mostly an interview transcript that mainly focuses on the band. Source 2 is another interview transcript with no secondary coverage. Source 3 is a database listing and is not reliable according to WP:A/S. Source 4 is another interview transcript. Source 5 is a reposted press release. Source 6 is another interview focusing on the band. Source 7 only offers a trivial mention of Väyrynen and focuses on the band. Source 8 is essentially the same content as source 1. Source 9 is a headline namecheck and a quote (not significant). Source 10 focuses on the band, not Väyrynen. Source 11 only offers a trivial mention. Source 12 is another interview transcript. Sources 13-16 are all non-independent. Basically, we're looking for independent significant coverage about Väyrynen, not the band. WP:AFCHD is generally a better place for AfC questions. C F A 💬 18:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your time. Zymologist (talk) 19:37, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

FTP URLs

When we link to FTP URLs, should we generally also link to HTTP archives of them. Given the general lack of browser support I expected that IAbot would do this, but it doesn't. In the article Code page 775, I'd like to add archives to the sources cited as "Code Page CPGID 00775 (pdf), IBM" and "Code Page CPGID 00775 (txt), IBM", but since IAbot didn't do it I thought I'd ask here. If the consensus is to include the archives, is there a bot that can do it? McYeee (talk) 19:16, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think there is established consensus on this, but in my experience fixing bare URLs, FTP links seem to die the quickest. An HTTP archive would be fine, or you could just replace the FTP link with an HTTP one altogether. C F A 💬 19:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

The URLs aren't bare in the articles I'm looking at, but I'll swap them anyways. There doesn't appear to be much of a consistent citation style. McYeee (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

How do you edit

I am strugguling 80.44.231.197 (talk) 12:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

In your one edit as this IP you removed a section title and image from an existing article, now reverted. What were you trying to do? Are you also editing logged into an account? David notMD (talk) 13:03, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! See WP:TUTORIAL for a quick overview on how to edit. Sincerely, Dilettante 20:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Filter

I attempted to edit an Article, but the Filter didn't publish my edit. What should I do? Cagliari in Serie A (talk) 19:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

You blanked an article and replaced it with "uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu" which the filter caught and stopped. What you should do is stop making unconstructive edits. C F A 💬 19:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@CFA Now I was patrolling recent changes! Cagliari in Serie A (talk) 19:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Cagliari in Serie A is globally locked. Cullen328 (talk) 20:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Gelp

Hi. I made the requested corrections; is that okay?done. if that's ok, can you move it from this section?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praeterintention Joseph77237 (talk) 14:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Joseph77237 You have re-submitted the draft, so it has gone back into the pile to be reviewed. Meanwhile, you need to take a look at our manual of style since it doesn't conform to guidelines on bolding of section headings (we don't!) and other aspects. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Joseph77237 (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I made the requested corrections; is that okay?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praeterintention

Hi. Joseph77237 (talk) 15:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I made the requested corrections. Regards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Praeterintention Joseph77237 (talk) 20:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

How do I edit an article to add a new section?

I understand how to create a section heading and how to edit within an existing section; what I can't figure out is how to edit at the level that would allow me to add a new section to an article. Thanks for any help you can offer! Don Q314 (talk) 20:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Don Q314 Click edit at the very top of the article. In the visual editor click the first dropdown and choose what what section level you want to add. For the source editor add a section using == on each side, adding more of them to each side changes the section level. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 20:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks! Don Q314 (talk) 20:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Is this permitted or a copyright violation?

This film/TV episode was very dear to my heart so please be kind. Can I make it an article, or would it violate copyright? TIA User:Allthemilescombined1/SandboxNo3 Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 02:17, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Allthemilescombined1: Wikipedia has many articles on TV shows. As long as you don't copy material from the show or other places, and write in your own words, it is not a copyright problem. RudolfRed (talk) 02:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

You may, however, want to make sure that it's notable. I have no idea whether or not it is. McYeee (talk) 02:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

No doubt with good intentions, McYeee is sounding rather too kind. The first thing you must do, Allthemilescombined1, is to check that you will be able to demonstrate that Ask Me Again ("90-minute episode of the PBS series American Playhouse that aired on February 8, 1989) really is "notable" (as defined by and for Wikipedia). If it is, good; go ahead. If it isn't, the draft won't go anywhere. -- Hoary (talk) 02:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Fair point. Notability is, as you point out, really quite important. McYeee (talk) 03:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

If you look at American Playhouse, many of the plays that were in time filmed and broadcast on the American Playhouse TV show are subjects of Wikipedia articles. The better ones can be models for your attempt. David notMD (talk) 03:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't think of that! Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 21:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Is self-published work a reliable and usable source of info about themselves?

There is a dispute at Talk:Microsoft_Windows#Privacy_features_addition_reverted and I'm looking for a second opinion. Is self-published work a reliable and usable source of info about themselves, such as "Person X says"? ("about themselves" include their personal view of other people or matters, whether it's explicitly stated, as in "I believe that" or not)

According to case 3 of Wikipedia:Identifying_and_using_self-published_works#Acceptable_use_of_self-published_works the answer to the question is yes. (the statement concerns the source itself) An example is given there: "For example, for the statement "The organization purchased full-page advertisements in major newspapers advocating gun control," the advertisement(s) in question could be cited as sources, even though advertisements are self-published."

The concrete case is this: Digital Confidence, a software company in the field of metadata stripping, has published in its official website an analysis of the built-in metadata stripper in Windows. This is a self-published work and therefore cannot be used as a source for the assertions made in the analysis. But I think it can certainly be used as a source for the simple fact that Digital Confidence has published such analysis. So Wikipedia cannot say that "the built-in metadata stripper is flawed", but it can definitely say that "According to Digital Confidence, the built-in metadata stripper is flawed", and use the analysis on Digital Confidence website as a reliable source for this statement. Another editor thinks I'm wrong. Any more thoughts would be appreciated. Sovmeeya (talk) 18:22, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Sovmeeya. I haven't looked at the dispute, but from your description above, I agree with you.

However, dispute resolution isn't about proving that you're right and another person is wrong: it's about how you can collaboratively come to a consensus. ColinFine (talk) 19:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, this amounts to 'Company A (who sells a competing product) has criticized Company B's product' in an article about Company B's product. MrOllie (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Sovmeeya, you're correct, the source could be used in that way and is reliable for a statement like "according to Digital Confidence, the built-in metadata stripper is flawed". But just because it's reliable doesn't mean we ought to say it. Many times, the question comes down to WP:DUE. You may want to try listing the issue at WP:3O for an uninvolved third editor to have a better look and provide their opinion. -- asilvering (talk) 23:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

When can I remove draft status of an article I wrote?

I wrote and submitted a bio for review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cristina_Eisenberg The article was declined once with comments. I made the corrections. I am an autoconfirmed user, but I'm unclear about whether it's ok for me to remove the draft status. Can anyone point me to clarification? Thanks! Bodhipup (talk) 20:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bodhipup: Yes, since you are autoconfirmed, you are able to move this to article space yourself with the "Move" tab. Articles for Creation is an optional process for autoconfirmed users that do not have conflicts of interest. It's up to you if you want to skip the additional review. C F A 💬 21:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bodhipup, I've accepted this draft, but I'm not totally convinced that her position is a "named chair" in the sense we're looking for. If you can find and add some academic reviews on her books, that would be helpful. -- asilvering (talk) 23:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

No Box to Publish Article

Hi, I'd like to publish my article Draft:List of circus accidents. It doesn't have the box at the top that usually allows you to submit it for review. I originally created Draft:List of fatal circus accidents, but wanted to change the name when I widened my scope. Since I couldn't figure out how to do so, I just made a new page. I don't know how to delete the one I no longer want, but it does have the correct box at the top. How can I submit the correct one for revision? Thanks! Gnat8 (talk) 20:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I've added the submission template; if you use the article wizard I believe it's provided automatically, but you can add {{subst:AFC draft}} to a draft if need be. 331dot (talk) 20:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Submitted, thanks! Gnat8 (talk) 20:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Next time you can't find a submit button, please feel free to try the AfC submission wizard. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gnat8, I notice there are some obviously unreliable sources in the references. You should have another read of WP:RS, and you might want to enable this handy userscript as well: User:Headbomb/unreliable. -- asilvering (talk) 00:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Can someone make a page about “حي البحيرات“ in Mecca ?

Because right outside of it is Masjid Al-Taneem and it’s a place people go around by car before Hijra…

so… can somebody make article? Please? Bebo12321 - Talk 10:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bebo12321 well, yes, we all can make such an article but it isn't likely anyone will do so unless they are interested in the topic. We are all volunteers here. If you want to give it a try, I suggest you look at this general guide to the process and note that this is the English Wikipedia, so all our articles and titles need to be in English. Google translate says that the title might be "Lakes district (Mecca)". Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bebo12321: One place to request a page like this is on Wikipedia:WikiProject Saudi Arabia/Article requests. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Can't stay logged in

When I log in, I click the "stay logged in for a year" box. Yet when I return to the site after some time I'm always logged out. This happens in 3 different browsers. In Firefox, which I use most, I have Wikipedia on the "always allow cookies" list, but it makes no difference. Reggie Pepper (talk) 15:03, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Reggie Pepper, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you allow cookies at both wikipedia.org and wikimedia.org? Is your browser set to not delete cookies when the browser is closed? PrimeHunter (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

And are you using the regular mode of your browser(s), or is it possible you are using "incognito" mode (it may be called different things in different browsers)? This would also discard your cookies when you are done, and have the same affect as PrimeHunter alluded to. Mathglot (talk) 00:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Restarting mode

this is in restarting mode please help me work it out so that it can be normal 197.215.23.40 (talk) 11:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

hi ip user and welcome to the Teahouse! do you have a question regarding Wikipedia? 💜  melecie  talk - 11:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

If this relates to the device/system you're using/viewing WP on, please contact the manufacturer (and/or their support line) or a computer-repair forum/outlet. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 07:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Adding an explanatory note

Hello

I've been trying to add an explanatory note to Joseph Barbera in the Early life section about his ethnicity but it's not appearing, although I used the template which appeared automatically after typing efn! could anyone tell me why is that and how to fix it? Thanks in advance Whatsupkarren (talk) 09:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Whatsupkarren. I have fixed some issues in the note and added {{notelist}} to display it.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 10:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Mass watchlisting pages

Hello there, Is there any way to mass watchlist certain pages in one (or not many) click(s), such as every episode article in a TV series, or every politician in a political party? Reply by VisualEditor is fine. Thanks very much! Mr Sitcom (talk) 08:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Nope, sorry. -- asilvering (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I'll need to do a lot of clicking, then. Thanks for the reply! Mr Sitcom (talk) 09:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mr Sitcom: I don't know if this helps, but you can edit the watchlist by simply adding page titles to it, via Special:EditWatchlist/raw. You would still need to know the exact titles you want to add, but if you can figure that out then this would at least save you having to visit each page individually to watch them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Mr Sitcom: See Wikipedia:User scripts/List#Categories for scripts to watch all pages in a category. I haven't tried it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you all for your responses, I will take a look at the suggestions. Mr Sitcom (talk) 12:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Why ask Why?

Why Women Kill Isiskhpri (talk) 10:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

This page is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? -- D'n'B-t -- 10:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Because that is the series title. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Compare this edit by the same username. "Not here", perhaps? -- Hoary (talk) 12:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

What is ‘that you own the copyright to’?

What is ‘that you own the copyright to’? What are some examples of this? Please tell me or give me a link where I can read more about it. Олена Бєляєва (talk) 13:21, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Олена Бєляєва I suggest you start by reading our article on copyright. Wikipedia cannot, in general, use material that has appeared in publications (books, websites etc.) which are still under copyright. It is the job of Wikipedia editors to summarize and paraphrase any such material to be included in our articles, with citations to the sources where we obtained the information. Copyright is a complicated legal area, so please be more specific if you have further questions after reading the links I supplied. See also this page about copyright of Wikipedia's articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Олена Бєляєва: In the context of Wikipedia, this literally refers to text or images which you yourself have created (or in very limited cases, where you have purchased or inherited the copyright from the person who did so). Note that (again, with very limited exceptions) this does not include taking a photograph of a work in which someone else owns the copyright. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Mobile view

Something changed within the last few hours. It used to be so if I was viewing a wiki page on my cell phone, and clicked the language button to go to a different language version, I would see the mobile version. Now I see the standard version instead. Batrachoseps (talk) 00:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

If you look at the URL, it should read as en.m.wik... If you remove the m, it should revert you back to desktop view. ✶Quxyz✶ 01:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I know, but I hardly think I should have to do that every time. Batrachoseps (talk) 01:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

at the very bottom of the page, you can see the "desktop view" at the rightmost part, click it and it will switch the default view back to desktop so you don't need to keep changing it on the url. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:55, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, I wasn't aware of it. To clarify, I was talking about when I was using a cell phone and wanted to use mobile view, but it showed desktop view instead. In any case, it doesn't seem to change the default view.

It used to be that it always redirected to mobile view when you were using a cell phone. Is that no longer the case? Batrachoseps (talk) 06:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Check the links you are clicking. Usually search engines like Google will give you the appropriate version, however, occasionally it will flip-flop. Also, I believe that direct links brings one directly to the linked version, but I am not sure how that works on mobile. ✶Quxyz✶ 11:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Somehow, the problem has been fixed. It now redirects to the mobile version. Batrachoseps (talk) 16:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok to add this quote?

Regarding Next Stop Wonderland, is it appropriate to add this: A quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson figures prominently early in the film. "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" means, to Erin, that predictable men aren't worth dating. At the end of the film, Erin learns that the correct quote is "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds". https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/353571-a-foolish-consistency-is-the-hobgoblin-of-little-minds-adored. With this new perspective, Erin realizes that if a dating prospect has his heart in the right place, that can make up for his lack of adventurousness. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 11:34, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Allthemilescombined1. As usual, it depends on the sources. If an independent commentator has discussed this quotation and its role in the story, then the article could summarise what the commentator says. If it is your own observation, then it is original research, and doesn't belong in the article - and the inclusion of the quotation then becomes trivia, and should probably not be there. ColinFine (talk) 12:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 16:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Unable to edit

Hello. Around 10 years ago I was very active from dynamic IPs. Lately either my range is blocked or the pages (articles) that I want to edit are protected. Even AN and ANI are currently protected but not teahouse. Why is that so? 2409:4081:1D9C:D478:0:0:4C0B:D90C (talk) 16:29, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I mean, why are so many ranges blocked, and why are so many pages protected? This used to be considered unusual back in the days. 2409:4081:1D9C:D478:0:0:4C0B:D90C (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP, I can't really speak to whether there's been an overall trend towards protecting more pages, but we've been experiencing some really persistent disruption from a very determined vandal over the past few months, so that might be affecting your experience. Sorry about that. The easiest solution would be to create an account, but if you don't want to do that for whatever reason, you'll have to work through Wikipedia:Edit requests for now, I'm afraid. -- asilvering (talk) 19:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Does this influencer meet the requirements for BLP-Notability? [German required/preffered]

I’m looking to write an article for a BLP, and have limited experience with the notability requirements for BLPs.

WP:Three are [1],, [2], and [3], originating from 20 Minuten. There is also some additional coverage, such as [4], [5].

I think we’re on the safe side of borderline notable, but am looking for a second opinion. FortunateSons (talk) 16:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, FortunateSons, and welcome to the Teahouse. On a quick look, I don't see much independent coverage. Apart from 2 and 3 (which appear to be the same link, but require registration, so I haven't looked at them) the rest are largely based on her words. See WP:42. ColinFine (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, ColinFine, thank you. My apologies, I fixed the link, it should work now.

While some parts are based on her words only (which obviously don’t count for notability), much of the other content is descriptive of her content and/or making claims in their own voice, enough to be considered SIGCOV if you struck every quote (IMO, but I could be very wrong). Obviously, everything coming directly from the subject would be covered by the usual restrictions. What do you think? FortunateSons (talk) 16:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, too busy giggling at "Shitstorm ist rasch entfacht" to provide a helpful opinion. -- asilvering (talk) 19:19, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

That’s definitely a good excuse in my book FortunateSons (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok, having managed to control myself: I don't think you're on the safe side of borderline, but I agree it's borderline and not an obvious no. I'm encouraged that some of the coverage goes back to 2021. And is this her too? But I don't like that most of the coverage originates from the same core story, and I'm not encouraged by the results of the "Kennst du die Tiktokerin Franny?" poll on #3, where only 7% of respondents on an article entirely about her say that they've even heard of her. But she's young and in a public-facing career, so she's pretty likely to become more notable as time goes on. It might be worth spinning up a draft, and checking every six months to see if there's anything you can add to it. -- asilvering (talk) 19:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I think it’s probably her, based on her design education and the uncommon name, but I’m not great with faces.

Yeah, I’ll definitely keep her in mind, she’ll likely keep growing, with my judgement slightly based on the fact a third person independently sent me one of her posts today. There was also SRF, which will be nice for aboutself background (she speaks pretty clearly, but I’m not the right person to transcribe Swiss German).

I think I’ll add her to my “needs one more article to be ready” list, thank you very much for your time! FortunateSons (talk) 20:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Need help in page publishing

Dear Administrators, Volunteers and Contributors Greeting of the day

I am writing in regard of my recently edited page but I faced rejection from Mr. @Saqib. I have made every effort to ensure that my submissions comply with Wikipedia’s content policies, including verifiability, neutrality, and notability. However, despite these efforts, he repeatedly rejected my page. I kindly request you all please suggest me a better way to publish my page.

here is the link of my edited page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dr._Mahboob_Ali_Sial Latifayazsiyal (talk) 18:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Latifayazsiyal Please read the helpful messages on your talk page. The draft appears to be promotional. I am not seeing your peacock words such as prominent, exceptional, or exemplary in the references you have provided. The article should reflect only what reliable sources say. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:00, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Latifayazsiyal, according to the page history, no one has ever declined or rejected this draft before. Did you create another version earlier under a different name? -- asilvering (talk) 19:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering It was created directly in mainspace and subsequently draftified by User:Saqib. Among other things, the title should not have "Dr.", per WP:TITLESINTITLES. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. My question remains. -- asilvering (talk) 20:21, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I think they forgot to mention that they are also working on an autobiography at Draft:Ayaz Latif Siyal, which both @S0091: and I rejected. I'm unsure why they would single me out in this situation. Maybe it’s just because we’re from the same country? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 21:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

eh, it's not uncommon for new editors to mistake reviewers/patrollers for one another, and you two both have names of about the same length that start with S. Easy mistake. -- asilvering (talk) 21:33, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Latifayazsiyal.

Please understand that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. Most or all of your sources are either not independent of Sial, or just mention his name. We require several sources that are reliable, wholly independent of Sial, and contain significant coverage of Sial (specifically - not just of his organisation). Only if you have several such is an article about him possible. ColinFine (talk) 20:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

My name appears on Wikipedia

My artist name has been mentioned in an article. I wish to add a new article to reference myself on wikipedia, so that people can click on my name, and actually see the work that I've done and how I've contributed to my particular craft within my culture. Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 21:50, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. If you're an artist or creative professional, you would need to meet the definition of a notable creative professional, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources, to merit a Wikipedia article- your name being in another article is not grounds by itself for you to get one.

Be aware that an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. It's highly discouraged for people to write about themselves, please see the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 22:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Elayne, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I am also mentioned in a Wikipedia article, but I am aware that I do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (because not enough independent material about me has been reliably published) and so I do not expect there to be an article about me.

If you meet the criteria (which are not about what you are, what you have done, or what you have said or created, but, again, depend on what has been published about you) then there could be an article about you. However, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write it yourself - see Autobiography. ColinFine (talk) 22:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Huh. I'm not mentioned by name anywhere. On the other hand, my Wikipedia username has been mentioned in a couple of reliable sources but not enough coverage for an article about me with my username as a title. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I have reviewed all the links you shared... interesting and important. Personally, I am cool with positive and negative articles to be referenced in an unbiased personal Wikipedia page, but will hang back until someone else feels the need to do it. I simply presumed it was a professional thing to do, to be honest. Seems I was wrong... Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 22:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

What's your artist name? One thing we can do is turn it into a red link, which increases the likelihood that someone else (someone from WP:WIRED, for example) will create an article on you. -- asilvering (talk) 23:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Her user name is her real name, and she's known by another name as described by her profile on the Irish Museum of Modern Art website here: https://imma.ie/artists/elayne-adamczyk-harrington/ ~Anachronist (talk) 23:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not finding either of those names anywhere, so this is where I give up. -- asilvering (talk) 23:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Temper-Mental MissElayneous Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 00:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Anachronist, would you say that one counts as independent in this context? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:44, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if a museum that profiles an artist whose work is on display at the museum would be considered independent. I could see making an argument analogous to one of the WP:MUSICBIO criteria, in which an artist whose work is displayed in two notable museums might be considered notable. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Anachronist Thanks. I will try to make this one on GNG grounds. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

https://misselayneous.com/news-archives

https://misselayneous.com/interviews

Thanks for your help everyone. It's been interesting to learn about these processes. I am in the process of formally documenting past media coverage, etc, for posterity or whatever. (Above I attach links to my progress on compiling articles & news, plus published interviews)*

It's incomplete at the mo. But getting there slowly & surely. And even if a Wikipedia page is not warranted, at least I can resume collating all media converage together in one place on my website.

Thank you all for your assistance

-E Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 07:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

That's a start. See WP:Golden Rule for what we expect in sources. Interviews don't count toward notability. Some of those sources look like they may be OK although they are all from the same place, hotpress.com. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

excellent. Thanks - will do!

Browsing today I found other items so far. Some are blogs and amateur kind of stuff, but a lot of the sources of coverage are reputable I.e. Irish Examiner and Irish Independent. I am trying weed out as we speak.

Interestingly, I have been invited to contribute to the UCD James Joyce Irish Poetry Archive, so this Wiki endeavour has really helped me to gather and organise that aspect of my career.

However, I have a physical archive of newpapers and such...much of what actually isn't digitised.

For example, I have the physical newspaper matching this online article:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/artsandculture/arid-40246097.html

But many of the newspapers and magazines I have are not online, i.e.; The Ticket 2012 I was featured on the front cover for a St. Patrick's Day special, having being commissioned to write a piece on Irishness for the occasion.

(I presume I can't share the scan as an image here)* Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 18:58, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

There is no requirement for sources to be online as long as they are properly cited, so that anyone who wants to verify can go to a library or use a subscription digital archive service to access the source. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:24, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

For the interested, Elayne Harrington. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång triumphs again. @Elayne Adamczyk Harrington you are very fortunate to have attracted his interest. Your next step is probably to upload a selfie to Commons so the article can include your picture. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:25, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

A triumph indeed. I certainly am fortunate. It's an excellent composition so far! Absolutely...I have a few photos. Not sure which to go for. Reviewing the suggestions again Elayne Adamczyk Harrington (talk) 23:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

All that in a day? Wow. Excellent work.

@Elayne Adamczyk Harrington: all it needs is a picture of you. It can be a selfie you upload and release to the Wikimedia Foundation under a free license. If it's a picture taken by a photographer other than you, then the photographer would need to release it to the Wikimedia Foundation under an acceptable free license. See WP:CONSENT for the communication template that needs to happen from the photographer, regardless of who it is. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I've not been here that long (2ish years) but I don't think I've seen this before. @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: what a nice thing to do for the artist. Knitsey (talk) 23:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Why are most drafts declined

Why because a lot of them I have seen are 86.97.103.231 (talk) 10:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

There are many reasons why they get declined, but the most common issue is simply a lack of notability, poor formatting or a lack of good citations. If you have specific pages in mind then feel free to post them here and we can take a look at why they were declined. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 10:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

IP editor. The decline reason is always given by the reviewer and can be seen at the top of the draft. So, for Draft:O with open top which you contributed to, it was for the simple reason that it cited no sources. All Wikipedia articles must be backed up by reliable, published sources which demonstrate the notability of the topic. Mere existence is not enough to have an article: see WP:NOT. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Doggo and Mike have given the demonstrable, factual reasons. I would like to give an answer at a higher level: because many drafts are created by people who do not understand Wikipedia's policies and practices, and have not spent time becoming familiar with them before they try to create an article.

I also observe that a lot of drafts are created by people as the first thing they do after creating an account, which gives rise to the suspicion that their purpose is to promote the subject of that draft (though they often don't realise that what they are doing is promotion according to Wikipedia's view).

Finally, I remember from my own early days editing, nearly twenty years ago, when I so much wanted to "make my mark" by adding a new article. I have no direct evidence that that desire is at play, but I'm sure it must be. ColinFine (talk) 11:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Another way to frame it, is that even slightly experienced editors don't need to use the AfC process - so you dont see the articles they create getting approved or rejected. -- D'n'B-t -- 13:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

The opposite is also true. I'm an experienced editor of 18 years, and admin for a dozen years, and even I have submitted a draft for review to get a second set of eyes on it. This has been helpful. In one case the reviewer convinced me to completely refactor the draft to be about an author's books rather than the author, and the result was a much better article that my original submission.

That said, AFC is the only venue available for an IP address who wants to publish an article, and it's the only realistic venue available for paid editors or COI editors. I have seen a COI editor publish an acceptable article without going through review, but it's extremely rare. Usually such attempts end up getting moved to draft space anyway. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Article Denial

My article, Draft:Chernoh Alpha M. Bah has been denied twice; first due to insufficient coverage and second because of unreliable sourcing. The topic has had some pretty widespread coverage and recognition, but the sources are primarily African news outlets. Can someone help me identify what may be the problem and if it's one that can be resolved considering the subject matter? Thanks. Gnat8 (talk) 15:59, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Gnat8, and welcome to the Teahouse. I haven't looked right through the list of sources in the draft, but I can see that several look as if they might be problematic. No 1 is published by his university, so is not independent and cannot contribute to establishing notability; Number 3 similarly, and 4 looks very much as if it is based on his words, not independent ones. 2 and 14 don't seem to mention him, and so contribute absolutely nothing to an article about him. 7 looks like a blog site, and does not appear to have any evidence of being subject to editorial control, and so is not a reliable source. I haven't looked further.

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

You need to look at each source critically according the the triple criteria of reliability, indepedence, and significant coverage: see WP:42. Any sources which are not reliable, or which do not mention him, should be removed (together with any information in the draft which is verified only by these sources). Any sources which are not independent of him and his associates, or which contain only passing mention of him, may be retained, but do not contribute towards establishing notability. ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Please look at WP:Golden Rule. Identify three sources that meet all three criteria at the same time. If you can't, then it's hard to make an argument that the subject merits an article on Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Long Island Sound Crossing

Article misspells the name of the road in Rye, NY where bridge would be located in Westchester County. Correct spelling is "Manursing", not "Mansuring." I used to live on Manursing Way. 2601:184:300:21:9899:BD7A:52F5:B1E8 (talk) 22:31, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

What article has this problem. It is not clear. Bduke (talk) 23:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it's Long Island Sound link. ayakanaa ( t ) 01:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Fixed, after consulting Google Maps. (Thank you for pointing this out, but anyone could have done what I did.) -- Hoary (talk) 03:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Japanese dynasties

.. Can anyone please assist with Japanese dynasties,and the role they played in modern Japan...

... Immortalising their roles & impact on current Japanese society...

.... I do love facts like the 1st three years of Japanese schooling are only about Discipline and Respect,how can such a great culture curriculum be applied to African school systems... 121Joe (talk) 03:47, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello from Tokyo. On the monarchy, read T. Fujitani's Splendid Monarchy (U California Press). I sense that you are deluded (or joking) about Japanese education. NB this page is for questions about the use of Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 04:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

If you have done research about this then you can write that from yourself, If you write an article about that or you can expand articles like Imperial House of Japan and History of Japan.–– kemel49^{(connect)(contri)} 04:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

General question

Are comments by IPs valid in any AFD? Youknow? (talk) 14:59, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Youknowwhoistheman Yes, see WP:AFDFORMAT, which says Unregistered or new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion, but their recommendations may be discounted if they seem to be made in bad faith. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Youknow? (talk) 15:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

On the other hand, comments by SPAs (WP:Single-purpose accounts) are often not valid, and these are often made by IP addresses or new accounts because of off-Wiki canvassing. When I evaluate an AFD discussion, I generally ignore SPA comments in my judgment unless they are well-reasoned policy-based arguments (which is almost never the case with SPA comments). ~Anachronist (talk) 00:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, you are right @Anachronist. can you check the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E. A. Jabbar - Wikipedia? Youknow? (talk) 07:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

String theory

Space object connections have not a single atmosphere chain locks, it's working only in english reactjs string. 62.181.56.1 (talk) 04:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Your posts to artocle Talk pages have been reverted as nonsensical. Do you have a question? David notMD (talk) 06:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I can't provide a picture over internet without language package. 62.181.56.1 (talk) 08:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Looking for mysteriously DELETED PAGE - "Draft:Hotcakes & Outtakes (Little Feat album)"

I was working on a page yesterday, linked it, added credits and footnotes. I was told it didn't meet standards, UNKNOWN WORK? or something like that. Bad source (Discogs.com - verified data, from orig album source. ("Little Feat" American Rock group from the 1970s-90s)

TODAY it is all gone. DELETED.

I can't even access to copy data to utilize for my own use.

DELETED PAGE is - "Draft:Hotcakes & Outtakes (Little Feat album)"

> I thought I had 6 months to figure out how to use your 'system', so as to correct my dirty little deeds - apparently this is not true.

ANY assistance would be of help, I just don't know how to connect / access people who know about these things. Stumbling around a rabbit hole of 'links' that don't relate to "FINDING out WHAT happened to a page I was working on." Don't want to FILE some LEGAL document for such a small trial page.

THANKs for your TIME and expertise!

(Apoplogies IF this communication is in a TOTALLY wrong place. It was the only place I could find to ASK A QUESTION 'to the ether'.

cheers Rklund (talk) 03:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I expect that 331dot will soon be along to explain, and perhaps restore. Meanwhile: (i) "Deletion" doesn't actually mean deletion. (ii) The "deleted" draft appears to reproduce a review, in toto. Credit is given for this, and the fact that it's a quotation isn't obscured. Thus the intention isn't dishonest -- but all the same, this isn't satisfactory. (iii) The "deleted" draft has an excessively long list of credits. (iv) No, you don't want to file some legal document. (v) The more CAPITALS one uses, the less persuasive one becomes. -- Hoary (talk) 03:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

According to a link from your Talk page, an author (you) asked that it be deleted. If not true, expect the draft to be restored. David notMD (talk) 06:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Rklund I assumed that this comment was made by you and in this comment it was said "you can delete this page whenever you choose" so I interpreted that as a deletion request. Since that apparently was not the case I will restore it. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

You don't have a time limit on editing the draft as long as it's active- so you have as long as you need, not "six months", the six months is only if the draft is completely inactive for that time. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Reads like an ad vs appropriate sources

A new entry has been rejected due to "reading more like an advertisement" and problems with the references. Are both of those problems equally important or does using appropriate sources carry more weight? CBathka (talk) 17:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

CBathka, the issues are equally important because they relate to our three core content policies. Problems with the references relates to Verifiability and possibly No original research. The advertising concern relates to the Neutral point of view. Cullen328 (talk) 17:57, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Does this refer to Draft:Microsoft Azure Quantum? I've never seen an advert that looked like that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

"Tenuta Pantanacci" page deleted

Hello All, i've just created the article "Tenuta Pantanacci" but it has been cancelled. May i know the reason? Who can help me? Tenuta Pantanacci (talk) 14:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello. First, are you Tenuta Pantanacci? Second, you wrote in Italian, and this is the English Wikipedia. You need to go to the Italian Wikipedia if you want to write in Italian. 331dot (talk) 15:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Consistent spelling/grammar errors from IP

There is an IP whose edits I've been following for a bit, as they make a lot of spelling and grammar errors(I suspect English may not be their first language) though I try to just fix up some of the more obvious errors. However, they often will go back and revert my edits without explanation anyway. As far as I can tell they have never used a talk page, so discussion with them would likely be pointless, but I also don't want to start getting into an edit war with this person. Is there something I can/should do in this scenario? LaffyTaffer (talk) 14:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

You need to use their talk page; in case your assumption is incorrect. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Linking to interviews in BLP

More of a general question: I have seen some BLP articles which contain many external links to extensive interviews with the subject of the article. I reviewed the Wikipedia:External links page and it includes detailed interviews as an example of an acceptable external link, but I am wondering at what point it is considered excessive? If an author has done an extensive interview every time they have released a book, is it considered acceptable to link each interview? Should these be condensed down to a few choice interviews, and how is that decision made? Mintopop (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Adding hundreds of interviews to an article would certainly be spammy. A better solution would be to start an RfC or a discussion to build consensus with other editors related to the article and add only the important ones. GrabUp - Talk 07:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Mintopop, in cases like this, I always look to existing practices in Good articles and Featured articles about similar topics. So, I took a look at a Good article about a renowned actress Meryl Streep and saw no interviews of her in the external links of her article. I then looked at the biography of a famous actor, Lawrence Olivier, which is a Featured article. No interviews in external links. So, I looked at biographies of authors. William Gibson is a Featured article with one external link to an interview. Ursula K. Le Guin is a Featured article with external links to four interviews. Kurt Vonnegut is a Featured article with no external links to interviews. So, I think that the established practice is that external links to a a very small number of interviews is OK, but more than a handful is not OK. As for how to select the best interviews, those would be the ones that cover the person's entire career as opposed to their most recent commercial release, and those that are conducted by notable interviewers and published in highly notable periodicals. In the end, the selection comes down to well-informed editorial judgment, which is a precious commodity. Cullen328 (talk) 08:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, this makes sense and I appreciate your insight. I am finally biting the bullet and trying to just "Be Bold!" with my edits, but at the same time trying not to go too crazy. I keep your idea in mind of cross-referencing against articles deemed good by the community :) Mintopop (talk) 16:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@GrabUp Thank you! I have often noticed this on pages that seem to be less generally popular and have had the majority of their edits done by fans. It is sometimes difficult to tell if it is worth trying to start talk/rfc discussions on pages where it seems that no one is looking at it frequently. Is it Wiki practice to do it anyways, regardless of the perceived traffic levels? Mintopop (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Be bold. If someone disagrees with you, engage in a discussion. That’s all. GrabUp - Talk 16:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Could anyone take a look at this article

I created a draft and it was rejected please help me get it published here's the link Draft:Lean Savage. Blueman17 (talk) 14:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Blueman17. Your draft has not been Rejected, which means "no hope of qualifying for an article, please give up": it was Declined, meaning "not up to standard yet, please carry out improvements." This implies that the Reviewer does think that the Draft can potentially be improved to Article quality.

The Reviewer has advised that the draft does not (yet) demonstrate the subject's Notability – that is, that the subject has been sufficiently written about in published Reliable sources independently of him: in this case, the career-specific Wikipedia:Notability (music) is most relevant: please read it carefully and determine whether the subject meets the criteria there. If you think he does, you need to show this in the text.

I notice also that, outside of the two references for the Lede paragraph, the rest of the article is entirely unsourced. Every fact in a Wikipedia article needs to be cited to a source, at the end of a sentence or paragraph in which it (first) appears. (Usually, one source will cover all or most of the several facts in a sentence or paragraph, but either can have multiple sources.) You included all these facts because you know them: how do you know them? Unless you have some relation to the subject (or are the subject, but see WP:Autobiography) you must have read, heard (radio?) or seen (TV, etc?) them somewhere. You need to say exactly where using citations, as you did in the Lede. If you only know them from personal experience (see Wikipedia:No original research), without their having also been published, then they cannot appear in the article: this is all necessary because of Wikipedia's basic requirement of WP:Verifiability. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 17:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

That's harsh

Thanks I'll try to dig deeper

Would appreciate it if you help with the research Blueman17 (talk) 17:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

It may seem harsh, but it's necessary to maintain the quality of this encyclopedia.

Generally, Help Desk and Teahouse responders do not also engage in collaborative research with new editors, and I myself have no interest or expertise in this particular type of subject. Someone else reading this, however, may want to, in which case they will probably respond on your own Talk page, or the Talk page of the Draft. Good luck. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 17:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Article Expansion

Hi, can someone please see this Ehsan Zafar Abbasi article. I'll be more happy if someone evaluate this and expand this. Janabanigu (talk) 17:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Janabanigu, you may also want to solicit input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 21:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

How to make photo

कङञ provided this example (on my talk page). Hoary (talk) 21:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I have a question that how to make a photo like of country template photo? कङञ (talk) 09:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand "country template photo". Perhaps you could link to an example in order to explain what you mean. -- Hoary (talk) 10:46, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

कङञ responded here. -- Hoary (talk) 21:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

significance with characters

alr hi this comes fresh from the discord >:3 ive been trying to bring Serial Experiments Lain to GA since before my wikibreak, and a user on the discord pointed out NFCC 3a (the article has 4 non free images.). whilst going to look at these images, and check which ones are the least significant, i noticed that 2 of them are directly correlated to the main character. i have no idea when singular characters are considered significant, but it made it seem easier to clean the article.

idk im clueless. astral ▪️ he/him ▪️ >:3 16:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello AstralAlley, I'm counting 5?

• This one will cause no issues as it directly depicts the subject: File:Serial Experiments Lain DVD vol 1.jpg
• These three are up to discretion: File:Lain hacker small.jpg, File:Lain Haircut.JPG, and File:Lain Split Personnalities.JPG. All would be allowed under fair use, but Wikipedia's NFCC is stricter. They are all depictions of the same character, and someone could argue that NFCC says we should choose one.
• This is the only one that I think that majority of editors will object to: File:Serial Experiments Lain (TV) Screenshot 01.jpg It would be allowed under fair use, but is illustrating a very minor point in the article.

Have you done a GA before? If you ask questions at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations, you will likely get some input from regulars. Also, the images are not going to be a deal-breaker for a GA nomination. An article can pass with zero images, and some GAs currently have no media. Finally, and completely unrelated, Arisu was in the wrong and it's been years since I've watched this anime but I still get angry about her attitude at the end of the show.

Good luck! Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 21:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

with 2nd bullet point, since all 3 are of lain, and since a bulk of the articles characters talk about her specifically, i feel like i could hypothetically do that. just dont know if this all marks significance. idk ill work on it 2nite. astral ▪️ he/him ▪️ >:3 23:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Biographies

I've been looking at the biography of a living person, Gabriele Scheler. All concerns of the editors were addressed. The only exception is still insufficient documentation on early life. Yet the article was declined completely. What to do? PowerUser22 (talk) 14:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello. While you've edited the article about Fritz Scheler, you've never edited Draft:Gabriele Scheler. The draft was resubmitted for a review. All information about a living person must be sourced, see the Biographies of Living Persons policy. What is the source of your interest in this topic? 331dot (talk) 14:44, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Either add references or delete content. A question - have you been editing not signed in, as IP 79.199.170.144? David notMD (talk) 02:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Need some help with writing about a Political Organization in middle east

I need help with finishing an article I am writing about a political group in middle east, it was rejected so i want to know how can i improve? any advice would be highly appreciated. it is important to note that i'm making this article as a project for my degree. i major in International Relations and during one of my recent studies i encountered this issue, and i decided to dig deeper, but still my information is not complete. so if you also know about this matter and you are from middle east, please tell me more!

Draft:The Covenant. Lilyish134 (talk) 15:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

You asked this question at the AFC Help Desk, please only use one method of seeking assistance at a time, to avoid duplicating effort. Many of us follow all the Help pages. 331dot (talk) 15:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

IT was Declined. "Rejected" would have meant the the reviewer saw no potential to succeed. David notMD (talk) 02:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations.

I keep getting declined becase of “Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations.” I have included 4 footnotes and used them all in the article. What am I doing wrong? This is the link Draft:Yeidy Eish Eahelms1 (talk) 15:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Eahelms1, I think the answer to your question is "sometimes, reviewers screw up". I'll take a closer look for you. -- asilvering (talk) 02:46, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Okay, having looked into it some more, what you've done wrong is... you didn't resubmit it after fixing the problems. You're doing fine. Just resubmit it for another review. -- asilvering (talk) 02:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Can I use the userpage of a user that doesn't exist anymore?

Hello!

As many of you know, an official dark theme has recently been released, and with that release, I'd like ti change my user signature to be more accessible for dark mode users.

I only have 1 character to spare as is, and basically the only solution I can think of is to have some sort of shortened page redirect to my userpage.

I was thinking about User:QQ, but I noticed that it was an actual account that later renamed to User:UU, and was subsequently banned.

I'm not sure whether or not doing so is allowed, or whether it would cause confusion; however, the account has been banned for over a decade now... QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Something like this: [[User:Qtacc|‪Quokka's test account‬]] ([[User talk:Qtacc|talk]] | [[Special:Contribs/‪Quokka's test account‬|contribs]]), which would look like this: ‪Quokka's test account‬ (talk | contribs) 20:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quokka's test account (talk • contribs)

Hmmmm... SineBot thinks it's unsigned. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 20:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok you can opt out of SineBot so that's not a concern. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 21:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia's default signatures have a refreshingly high signal-to-noise ratio. -- Hoary (talk) 21:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: but your custom signature already has dark background? It's honestly easier to read it in dark mode since the whole page has a dark background. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC) Ping: QuickQuokka, 21:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

To avoid confusion and putting you on a bad spot as the username intend to use is banned, it's better you change your username to something else Tesleemah (talk) 05:23, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Education Minister

Publish the copyright Law in your License format,graphics,photographic, and files wat is he in copyright Law in 9 1. The Laws in company 2.publish and attribution 3.copyright law for in License 4.Errors and Fakesvg 5.JPEG or svg 6.the knows in images in copyright Laws? 7.Raster and vector versions other in 8.Author the gives copy to commons in Wikipedia or Wikimmedia edia commons 9.copyright law in the United States 2A02:CB80:4225:8D68:E817:ADF4:1B11:D6B5 (talk) 08:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

This makes little sense to me as a Wikipedia editor with 15 years of experience. I simply cannot comprehend what question you are trying to ask. Please try to write like a human being instead of a robot. Thank you for your humanity. Cullen328 (talk) 08:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

IP ,that's a lot of questions, and questions about the laws and copyright issues about images of various types would be better handled at the Wikipedia Commons copyright forum. Try your questions there. If you repeat your question there, you might want to clarify what you mean by "errors and fake SVG" files. Good luck, Mathglot (talk) 08:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Citing a Podcast as Source

Hello! Someone recently deleted an entry by suggesting that the source was a podcast and paywalled, and took issue with the reliability of the source. The person was interviewed on a well-known US based podcast. That has validity in my opinion. Can anyone else comment on this so I can challenge his deletion? Satyagraha108 (talk) 19:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@Satyagraha108: We have template {{Cite podcast}} so you can cite it. Behind a paywall is not an issue, see WP:PAYWALL. If the source is not reliable for other reasons, then that is a different problem. I suggest you discuss it with the other editor to get clarity on their concerns of reliability, or you can ask at WP:RSN RudolfRed (talk) 19:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

The concerns described at Talk:Eknath_Easwaran#Podcast RudolfRed (talk) 19:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Saytyaraha108, and welcome to the Teahouse. "Well-known" is not the same as "reliable". The Daily Mail is well-known but not reliable; many sources are reliable but not well-known.

The question is whether that podcast is reliable by Wikipedia's standards: does it have editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking? If in doubt, ask about it at the reliable sources noticeboard. (It would have been helpful if you would actually tell us what source it is. I'm guessing it is one in Eknath Easwaran, but I can't be bothered to work through the edits identifying it). ColinFine (talk) 19:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

OK, it's the "Conspirituality" podcast, and it doesn't appear to have been discussed on WP:RSN. But, while it's not impossible that a reliable source (a source with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking) should publish on Patreon, it seems a bit unlikely, and my presumption would be that this is an audio blog, and so, not reliable. ColinFine (talk) 20:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

The person interviewed is sharing her mother's story and grew up at Easwaran's ashram. It seems reliable. Satyagraha108 (talk) 22:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Also, thank you for your insights! Satyagraha108 (talk) 22:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

The issue isn't whether the subject of the interview is being reliable(and no, people aren't always reliable about themselves, either accidentally or otherwise), but the podcast itself. Does it perform fact checking and have an editor examine the podcast for accuracy before it is posted? Most do not. 331dot (talk) 22:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying this. Satyagraha108 (talk) 23:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

It raises an interesting issue on the entire page though, because most of the biographical information about the person in question, Easwaran, is all based on his own accounts of himself, such as meeting Gandhi or his teaching positions in India. It's quite circular, he said it, someone else wrote it down, and now they can point to a source where...he said it about himself. Satyagraha108 (talk) 23:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

That does indeed sound as if it may have problems establishing notability. Are there any sources which meet WP:42? ColinFine (talk) 08:32, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Can I use this?

I am working to expand "Platte Lake (Minnesota)" and am wondering if this video could work as a source, because it is made by Plattelake.org, so.. ​​Platte Lake Improvement Association - History of Platte Lake Video Deerare2good (talk) 03:33, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Deerare2good, and welcome to the Teahouse. I haven't watched the video, but from your description, it sounds as if it is a self-published source, so it may be cited, but only for limited purposes, and does not contribute to establishing notability. ColinFine (talk) 08:36, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Redirect

Hello! I'm having trouble with this redirect. When I click the link Hogwarts#Slytherin on the redirect page, it takes me to the correct anchor on the Hogwarts page. However, if I type "Slytherin" into the WP search bar, then click the Hogwarts page that pops up, it doesn't take me to the anchor. If I'm editing a page in the VE and want to provide a link to Hogwarts#Slytherin, and I try to do this by typing "Slytherin" in the link finder, it doesn't find Hogwarts#Slytherin. Any thoughts? Wafflewombat (talk) 19:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I am not sure about the VE part, but when I search for Slytherin, the redirect works correctly. Maybe a browser issue? I am using Edge. RudolfRed (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat: The link tool in VisualEditor finds page names (including redirects), not section or anchor names. If I click the chain icon in VisualEditor to make a link and write Slytherin then the first option for me is "Hogwarts" which just links the article Hogwarts as it should. The second option is "Slytherin" which links the redirect Slytherin. If I write Slytherin in the normal Wikipedia search box at top of all pages then I see no Hogwarts option in the drop-down below the search box. The search results page [2] has an entry saying "Hogwarts (redirect from Slytherin)". You have to click "Slytherin" to use the redirect and go to the anchor. "Hogwarts" just goes to the article. This works as intended. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, now the link tool in the VE works exactly as you described. But the search bar at the top of the page still provides the Hogwarts page in the drop-down. If I don't click that link or any other link in the drop down, but rather just enter "Slytherin" and hit "enter", then I am directed to the Slytherin anchor. But there's nothing I can click in the drop down that gets me there. *Sigh* Maybe it's just my browser. I'll try a different one. Wafflewombat (talk) 20:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@Wafflewombat: I use the Vector legacy skin at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering but can reproduce your result in Vector 2022. It's discussed in phab:T306150. You can follow a redirect by clicking the search button or pressing the enter key, but you cannot see whether there is a redirect or you will get a search results page. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Is there a manual of style section for masculine/feminine nouns?

Is there a MoS for using nouns such actor/actress etc? It has come up at the article Amy Poehler and I've sometimes seen editors change nouns when the article subject is female.Knitsey (talk) 05:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@Knitsey, Perhaps this? MOS:GNL. Also, I believe that the word "comedian" should be used as seen in, e.g. Lucille Ball. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 05:18, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that's applicable here? Thank you though. It's not the gender of the person that's in question, it's whether we use the male or female noun to describe their profession. Correct use would be actress or actor, Comedienne or comedian. I generally use the male version, actor, to describe both male and female artists but that's just me. Knitsey (talk) 05:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@Knitsey, This might be what you were looking for: [3] at WP:WAW. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 06:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Use of "actors", "comedians", "chairmen", "waiters", "executors", etc to refer to groups of both male and female artists is not just you, Knitsey. And classifying "actor", "comedian", "chairman", "waiter", and "executor" as "male nouns" (or "male versions") is rather odd. Wikipedia:Gender-neutral language may be what you're after. -- Hoary (talk) 06:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

OK, that's a little clearer, thank you. I'm still not sure though if you would refer to, for example, Emily Atack as a comedian or comedienne. The article describes Atack as an actress and comedian. If someone changed it to comedienne would this be acceptable.

Just to reiterate, I've no interest in changing any of this, it's more about whether it should be reverted or not. I've seen changes like this before and wondered if it was ok. Knitsey (talk) 06:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

My guess, Knitsey, is that the relationship of "comedian" to "comedienne" is in practice not the same as that of "actor" to "actress". Putting aside questions of whether or not use of this or that term is, or could be, sexist, "comedienne" is alone among the four in being at least a little unusual. Imaginably a number of writers of articles here don't even know of it. (I speculate that its uncommonness has something to do with its odd morphology: it looks like a straightforward loan from French whereas "comedian" does not.) So I'm not surprised if one writer, or one group of writers, calls a woman an "actress" and a "comedian". The combination does strike me as slightly odd, and I might want to regularize the description. There are of course two ways of doing this: (A) changing "comedian" to "comedienne", XOR (B) changing "actress" to "actor". Wikipedia:Gender-neutral language would prescribe (B), not (A). -- Hoary (talk) 09:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Knitsey, this is a very interesting question with a lot of implications. My initial egalitarian instinct is to use gender neutral terms to describe careers. Not "waitress" and "stewardess" but wait staff and flight attendants. "Nurse" instead of male nurse. But how about actors and actresses? We could just call them all actors, but the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences still calls them "actors" and "actresses". Meryl Streep is described as an actress. And when Linda Hunt brilliantly played the male character Billy Kwan in The Year of Living Dangerously, she was nominated for an Oscar for "Best Supporting Actress" not "Best Supporting Actor", and she won that Oscar. So, caution and flexibity is in order, along with a dedication to accurately summarizing what high quality reliable sources say, favoring newer over older sources of similar quality. We are not linguistic innovators and we are not linguistic laggards. We need to do our best to reflect and follow the best contemporary sources. As for "comedienne", I think that is outdated terminology 99% of the time. You see how I hedged my bet? Cullen328 (talk) 09:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Hoary I didn't think about looking at the etymology. I don't think I've seen or heard anyone use comedienne for a long time. I listen to a lot of BBC Radio 4 which seems to be the last bastion of RP (fast dwindling thank goodness) and I can't recall hearing comedienne being used.

Cullen328 That's an interesting point about Linda Hunt. I take your point about innovators/laggards. Hedging bets is always advisable.

I would probably revert comedienne but it's not a bright line for me. Thank you all for the advice. Not totally clear but I'm a little clearer on expectations. Knitsey (talk) 09:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@Knitsey I would also suggest tasking in to account how the person describes themselves. For example, if a female actor regularly described themselves as an 'actress', I would tend to go with that description of them here. So, I'd look at their own website, writings or biographical notes on a book to see what term they prefer to use when writing about themselves. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Nick Moyes now that you've said it, that seems really obvious. I didn't think of that. That is the first thing we do when describing someone who is non binary, but it kind of slipped my mind when it comes to someone who is cisgender. Thank you for the reminder. Knitsey (talk) 17:04, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@Knitsey That's a common sense comedienne has rarely used even in real life, why we need such a terminology. Comedian is a gender neutral word, that's why I reverted their version and they included an inexistence module. -Lemonaka 11:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Lemonaka I would use comedian too, looking at what sources outside of Wikipedia say about gender neutral nouns, particularly job titles, then comedian is the gender neutral term whilst still being the masculin noun. I certainly wasn't complaining about your revert, I was probably have reverted it myself if I had seen it first, per WP:BRD.It's something I told myself I would ask about the next time I had an example to give. Knitsey (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Language change is a language universal. When you've lived long enough, you can see it happening. Questions like this one have a definite factor involving language change over time. One illustrative example is to compare airline steward,airline stewardess, and flight attendant until around 1965, and then compare the same terms since then. Comedian has always been far more popular than comedienne since Shakespeare's time (no surprise there), and for a hundred years (1900-2000) was about ten times more popular, but since 2000, 'comedienne has gone into a slow, steady decline. Mathglot (talk) 08:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

You did graphs! Thank you Mathglot, that's a really interesting comparison and fits with what other users are saying, particularly in relation to the use of comedienne. Knitsey (talk) 11:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Finding a photo

I don't think this actor is notable enough for his own page, despite my wishful thinking. I would like to find a photo of him, though. I apologize if this is not appropriate to ask here.

Robert Bruce (born 1953) is a Canadian actor who appeared in Alone in the Dark (2005), Da Vinci's Inquest(1998) and Stargate SG-1 (1997).

2006 Family in Hiding · as Defense Attorney

2005 Alone in the Dark · as Crewman Barnes

2003 Barely Legal · as Coop's Dad

2003 D.C. Sniper: 23 Days of Fear · as Montgomery County Councilman

2001 Animal Miracles (TV Series) · as Danny

2001 Just Cause (TV Series) · as Cop

2001 The Lone Gunmen (TV Series) · as Resident Surgeon

1999 Aftershock: Earthquake in New York (TV Series) · as Jury Foreman

1998 The New Addams Family (TV Series) · as Mr. Bates

1998 Da Vinci's Inquest (TV Series) · as Police Constable #4

1998 Cold Squad (TV Series) · as Larry

1997 Stargate SG-1 (TV Series) · as Local

1995 Mysterious Island (1995) (TV Series) · as Zachary

1992 Grampire · as Truckie

1989 The Freeway Maniac · as Terry "Robert Bruce". Plex TV. Retrieved 25 August 2024.

1989 American Playhouse "Ask Me Again" · as Nelson Rodker

"Robert Bruce (VI)". IMDb. Retrieved 25 August 2024. "Robert Bruce". TCM. Turner Classic Movies. Retrieved 25 August2024. "Robert Bruce". IMDb. Retrieved 25 August 2024.

Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 10:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, please remember that IMDb is not a reliable source. See WP:RSPS. Ahri Boy (talk) 10:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I know this page will never make it out of my sandbox. I just want to see his picture when he was young because of nostalgia I have for an appearance of his. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 10:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Allthemilescombined1 Teahouse is not a place to post lengthy content that you have no question about nor intent to incorporate into an article. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Reference ideas box

Hello, another question! I found a very useful template which I've implemented on this talk page. Right before the discussion threads is a box with a link to "references to use". I linked it to a separate page, which is good because it doesn't clog up the talk page with a long list of references. Does anyone know how to accomplish the same thing but without making the box film-specific? Is there a more generic template without the film icon and the link to the film WikiProject? Wafflewombat (talk) 00:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello Wafflewomabt, I don't think exactly what you're asking for exists. Here are several close things:

First, {{Refideas}} is made for this purpose. It doesn't use a separate page, but is collapsible. Using the list above as an example:

Second, {{tmbox}} is the template used to make talk page message boxes. You can place anything inside it, like this:

And even use other icons like this:

Or this:

Finally, any article can have a "Further reading" section (MOS:FURTHER). A lot of editors will place references there which also makes it available to the non-editing readers, who don't open talk pages.

To see how either banner works, click on "Edit source" for this section. If you have questions, feel free to reach out, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:42, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

This is awesome. So many options! Thanks! Wafflewombat (talk) 13:44, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Matt Bevan

Was there ever a page of this Australian journalist in Draft namespace? If so, can it be revived? Doug butler (talk) 13:58, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Doug butler That page was deleted twice, both times for being an abandoned draft, this occurs when a draft hasn't been edited for 6 months. You can see those deletions here. You can request that the page be sent to your userspace here. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks CD. Doug butler (talk) 14:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Delete account created by a minor with a school email address

I am trying to delete an account my son created with his school email address. I cannot find any way to do this. I would greatly appreciate any help. Maximopinera (talk) 15:05, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Maximopinera Wikipedia accounts cannot be deleted. E-mail addresses can be easily disconnected from an account, however. Go to Special:ChangeEmail and leave the input box blank. If your son wants to, account vanishing is an option, but accounts can't be "deleted" just renamed and/or abandoned. Cremastra (talk) 15:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Maximopinera: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1233. Unfortunately, accounts can't be deleted for reasons related to attribution. Unless the account name uses the email address, no one but him will know what it is. You could try asking for a courtesy vanishing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

How find the information listed by using {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} in the articlr

"The {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template provides incorrect information. The reference cited does not support the information mentioned." Hobbywriterae (talk) 14:01, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Is there a reason this question is asked in "quotes"? Are you quoting a message another editor gave you? If a reference doesn't support WP:V, it can be removed, along with the claims. Please link to the article you are talking about; it is difficult to help people when the questions don't give hard examples. Cremastra (talk) 15:10, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Apparently Vizhinjam International Seaport Thiruvananthapuram, similar question asked at the Help Desk, but I didn't understand it there either. @Hobbywriterae Please use one venue only and expand on your issue so we can help. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, there's no reason behind quoting it. The problem I face is that I tried to remove the {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} under the 'Further Reading' section because the information mentioned is incorrect, and the reference does not support it. However, it showed an error. I don't know how to remove or correct the information

here is the link to article :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vizhinjam_International_Seaport_Thiruvananthapuram Hobbywriterae (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Hobbywriterae, please don't use that template directly on this page, it messes up the formatting. Instead, put <nowiki> tags around it so that people can see it but it's not an active template. (I've now done this for you, twice). Maproom (talk) 16:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Hobbwriterae. The template {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} simply says "display the references that are tagged as 'lower-alpha' here". If you want to alter or remove one of those references, you need to find where it is actually cited in the text, and edit it there.

It is in fact cited just above, at the end of the previous section, "Further reading".

Section 3.2.4 of that source says The depth required for maneuvering and berthing of cruise ships is naturally available at the proposed location and will not involve any capital dredging, which seems to me to support the text that it is cited for. But I may be missing something. ColinFine (talk) 17:16, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject skateboarding isn’t inactive?

I don’t really know if the Wikiproject Skateboarding is inactive. I think it is an active WikiProject. Minecraft6532 (talk) 20:17, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Skateboarding

Last talk page message is from Sept 2023 and the todo list has not been updated since 2021. RudolfRed (talk) 20:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, the last message was almost a year ago and the last non-automated message was over 4 years ago, but you are free to change the {{WikiProject status}} if you're planning on reviving it. C F A 💬 20:24, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Citation replacement on the 1994 Cook County, Illinois, elections page

Citation 2 on 1994 Cook County, Illinois, elections is a Chicago Tribune article sourced from newspapers.com, however you can just find the article online here I have noticed that for whatever reason the actual author isn't attributed on that page, though it is in the original citation. Here are some questions:

• Do I change the citation to the accessible link?
• Do I change the author to Chicago Tribune Staff if I do since it doesn't specifically mention the author and just says Chicago Tribune.

Ztormtrooper (talk) 22:42, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Ztormtrooper, first question: yes, do please change the link. Second: Newspapers.com is giving me contradictory messages about my access to their version of the article (I can, but I can't, but I can, but I can't), so (i) I can't check to see whether the author's name really appears in the article or whether instead the name is in error, and (ii) I'm sufficiently annoyed with Newspapers.com to want the link to go elsewhere. Anyway, for an article such as this, I think that the name of the author is of little importance. For a Chicago Tribune article to be attributed to "Chicago Tribune staff" says very little; I'd skip that too. -- Hoary (talk) 23:48, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply Hoary. I'll replace it and skip listing the author in the citation. Ztormtrooper (talk) 00:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Little League World Series Asia-pacific and Middle East Region

Could someone fix my mistakes please? I don't know how I accidentally deleted something, and a flag needs to be added and the gray for runners up for 2024 in llws results. Thanks. Knoote96 (talk) 23:55, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

The article is Little League World Series (Asia-Pacific and Middle East Region). What is it that you have accidentally deleted, and what other mistakes have you made? -- Hoary (talk) 00:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

How can i view all image uploads from a specific user on Wikimedia?

Hey all, as the title suggests, I would like to view all Wikimedia Commons image uploads from a specific user. I cannot find any filters for this.

Regards. HoldenFan1104 (talk) 01:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles. Just add user name Moxy🍁 01:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks very much HoldenFan1104 (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@HoldenFan1104 Alternatively, just navigate to the user's page or talk page on Commons and use the menu on the left which has both "User uploads" and "User contributions". You can get there very quickly from looking at any image and clicking through to the user page listed as part of the File history. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Appreciate the information, thanks. HoldenFan1104 (talk) 02:57, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Musical notability & sufficient content

Hello! I want to ask for advice about musical notability criteria for this draft. This draft is about 3Racha, an in-house producing team of Stray Kids. The draft recently got declined because of "not meeting the musical notability criteria".

For musician element, 3Racha only officially released multiple non-commercial mixtapes. They only have 4 officially released songs but released as part of side-track on Stray Kids albums (credited as Bang Chan, Changbin, Han)'s song rather than (3Racha). But has collaborated once and the collaborations officially credited as 3Racha. Although because of that, I understand they may have not established enough notability in the musician factor.

I believe that 3Racha may be considered notable in composers and lyricists factor. They were credited as 3Racha on almost all Stray Kids' "considered notable" songs. 3Racha also had been awarded in the Best Producer category in South Korean award ceremony, they had been nominated twice in the similar category from two different award ceremonies.

Can you give me example of how should I improve the draft? Should I make the "Works and musical style" section like what it is in the Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart article for the "insufficient content"? Actually I'm confused of the criteria because it seems like focused on composers like Mozart and Paganini who composed a sonata. It would be great if you can guide me to article of a modern music producer who is notable but only wrote for others so I can understand better of the implementation for the criteria (if there's any because songwriters that I knew got considered notable for because of their musician factor rather than songwriting factor like Bumzu and the songwriter Kenzie article seems not so strict for her article) Thank you in advance!— Shenaall (t ♣ c) 04:44, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello Shenaall!

I think the main reason the draft was declined was because there are not enough reliable sources from independent sources like newspapers and magazines. While I see some citations there, there are in Korean. I will suggest that before you resubmit it, you add more references.

Also, if they have a major record label and have win a gold medal, this will further establish their Notability, else, I will suggest you wait till they meet some Notability guide before you send it again for review.

Best! Tesleemah (talk) 06:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Also, some things there are not very neccesary. You can remove the part you explained how names are derived in hangul. Remove contents you can't find enough sources for too, at least, the article can stand as a stub. Tesleemah (talk) 06:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

[edit conflict] Hi, Shenaall! The key point is that to Wikipedia, WP:Notable doesn't generally mean "the subject is important (or influential, or prominent, etc.) in the field in which the they work", it means roughly "the subject has been extensively written about (not merely listed) in published Reliable sources independently of any direct input from them or their associates." A Wikipedia article should consist mostly of summaries of the material in such sources.

This means that, however many writing or production credits 3Racha has/have, those do not in themselves contribute to 3Racha's notability. (Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for composers and lyricists, point 1 says ". . . may be notable if they . . . [have] credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.", but 'may be' is not definitely 'are', and obviously the Draft reviewers did not think this criterion was sufficiently met.

In short, you really need to find at least three different and independent published articles, or at least several paragraphs within three such articles, specifically about 3Racha. Hope this helps {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 06:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

How much citations does an aircraft accident need?

My draft was declined mainly because of not enough information, so how much would I need on a crash like this? I've tried adding as much information as I could find in the sources included. Bloxzge 025 (talk) 00:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I would check out WP:GNG. Most likely it needed more independent secondary sources. Ktkvtsh (talk) 01:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Or more specifically, WP:NEVENT, which requires coverage beyond routine reports and database listings. C F A 💬 01:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

i added more sources, not sure if it helps but yeah Bloxzge 025 (talk) 02:46, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Bloxzge 025, two or three high quality sources is usually enough. It seems that there are no sources that weren't published the day of the accident, indicating it may have no lasting significance. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The problem with Draft:2023 Jet Rescue Air Ambulance Learjet 35A crash, Bloxzge 025, is not the number of sources cited but the paucity of material in the sources cited. Is the crash covered in depth in three or more sources that are independent of each other? If not, how else is the subject notable? -- Hoary (talk) 01:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Your right, thanks. If any new notable sources are published I'll try again Bloxzge 025 (talk) 01:54, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I've added new sources Bloxzge 025 (talk) 02:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'll ping the reviewer TheBritinator, but one issue I can see is that flightsafety.org and baaa-acro.com seem to be databases, which don't provide the kind of in-depth coverage that a Wikipedia article needs. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:53, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Bloxzge 025, this crash is already covered in Learjet 35, along with many other crashes of similar planes. That may be a better outcome than a freestanding article. Cullen328 (talk) 02:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

your right, I just wanted to create a plane crash article, including my draft with more info. I still want it as an article since I've already put hours into researching/finding sources, but if not that's okay too Bloxzge 025 (talk) 02:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

That was my concern too. I did not many sources to establish the event as notable. I figured it could probably be merged elsewhere, but I see you have already figured that all out. Thanks. TheBritinator (talk) 07:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Preventing a previously deleted article being readded

Today, I noticed an obvious troll article, Wikipedia:Dante Antonio Muñoz Carriman, has been deleted multiple times now but the LTA behind it continues to use sockpuppets to readd the article. It is easy to remove but it would be nice if there was a way of blacklisting the article from being created in the first place? Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 09:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Foxy. Yes, an article title can be SALTed. I don't know the procedure, but that page will no doubt tell you how. ColinFine (talk) 09:17, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Fantastic Mr. Fox I deleted that the last time- I considered salting it- and it might happen- but often a user who does behavior like that will just evade the salting. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Good movie websites

Elaborating on my last question, which is now archived, which movie websites would be good? IF you can, provide a list of good and bad websites. 3.14 (talk) 21:00, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

I think the answers you got last time are adequate, particularly in view of the fact that you are vague about what constitutes a "movie website". I suggested Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. Newspaper reviews from notable reviewers are also good. It isn't clear exactly what you are asking for if you have to ask it again in the same vague manner as before. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:04, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but can you provide the answers from last time? In all honesty, I might have forgot all of them. 3.14 (talk) 20:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1232#Slavitza Jovan translated. The answer from ColinFine below is much better, however. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:01, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. 3.14 (talk) 18:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, 3.14. Have a look at WP:WikiProject Film/Resources. ColinFine (talk) 21:07, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah, excellent, I wasn't aware of that comprehensive list. I never looked at that Wikiproject page before. @3.14159265459AAAs: at the bottom there is also a short section about sites to avoid. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:13, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

I've never seen it before either, @Anachronist: I just had a hunch it might exist. ColinFine (talk) 22:09, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

چ 2.147.219.6 (talk) 12:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

About my draft

I have submitted a draft previously and it got rejected 21st August 2024, I made the asked edits and resubmitted it, I want a professional to check and let me know if it is ok or not.

Link- Draft:Abhiishek Mohta Solveitabhinav (talk) 10:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

It was Declined, which is less severe than Rejected. There are no 'professional' people here - Reviewers and Teahouse hosts are all unpaid volunteers. You have resubmitted it, and in time a review will take place. David notMD (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Sources for Political News

Are news sources like FOX, Newsweek, MSNBC and Vox allowed to be cited in articles about politics? I ask because these sites often cherrypick information to promote a political agenda, or downright lie to again push an agenda. Also, are news sources that are slightly partisan like ABC and The Wall Street Journal allowed to be used as sources in political Wikipedia articles? ApteryxRainWing (talk) 13:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@ApteryxRainWing You'll find the consensus about these sources at WP:RSPS. In some cases you may need to look at the archives via the search box but the major ones have their own sections like WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Moving Roar (vocalization) to Roar

I wanted to move the page Roar (vocalization) to Roar (which would mean Roar is moved to Roar (disambiguation)), without doing a requested move. Using my best judgment, I don't think there would be opposition to this move. When I tried to move the page I got an error message saying The page could not be moved, for the following reason: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. I also can't find anything in the archives about requests to move these pages. I could try to free up Roar by moving it, but every time I a move page it creates a new page as a redirect. What should I do, and would a requested move be more suitable? Svampesky (talk) 15:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Svampesky. You need an admin to do that sort of move. Please request it at WP:RM/T (as long as you're confident it won't be controversial) ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm fairly confident, but I'll prepare an RM nomination if it gets challenged or reverted. Thanks :) Svampesky (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I could technically do this move as a page mover, but I wouldn't consider it uncontroversial because I don't think there's an obvious primary topic here. For example, Roar (film) has had 18 000 page views in the last month, while Roar (vocalization) has only had 2 000. You'd have to start a requested move discussion to gather more input. C F A 💬 16:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I saw this after I made the technical request, but I'll prepare a requested move nomination if it's declined. Svampesky (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

On the move subpage it lists the disambiguation as the move request and the move I was nominating at the bottom of it. This doesn't align with the rationale. I tried switching them around on the talk page, but it didn't change on the move subpage. How can I switch them around? Svampesky (talk) 17:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't like using page views to determine titles. The vocalization has been the understood meaning for centuries, and will still be that way after the movie is long forgotten by future generations. I recall seeing a policy or guideline somewhere (I can't remember which one) that says we need to account for history and longevity, not just popularity. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I struggled to find this. I remember writing about it in one of my Signpost pieces, I thought it would be under WP:LONGTERMSIGNIFICANCE, but that is a red-link. Svampesky (talk) 01:31, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Fount it! Wikipedia:Disambiguation#LTS. I couldn't remember the phrase "long term significance" and searching the Wikipedia namespace for that phrase turned it up.

My point is that we don't get to pick and choose what parts of the rules to follow, we need to look at the whole. On the whole, I would say that long term significance trumps whatever common name might be the current fad based on popularity. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I made that redirect. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:31, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. That's as it should be. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

The redirect WP:LTS is only used twelve times, would it be better for it to be targeted to a guideline page, rather than an essay, so editors don't have to type out in full WP:LONGTERMSIGNIFICANCE? Svampesky (talk) 14:33, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Broken Article

I just tried to create a page for the Saturn INT-05 (Draft:Saturn INT-05), but the infobox is broken. Does someone know how to fix this? Toxopid (talk) 15:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Toxopid This usually happens when the }} get out of step. I've added one pair and the infobox is better, although it still shows some errors. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for fixing it. I will fix the errors that are still there. Toxopid (talk) 15:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Adding citations for awards at state competitions for AfC

Have a draft that am trying to get created and I believe it needs additional criteria. I'm trying to add the awards that the band has won but they're stored on a proprietary database by organiser (Band Association of NSW) - https://bandnsw.com/ContestResults.php . What's the best way of adding the list of awards and provide adequate proper citations ? 203.220.221.175 (talk) 10:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Never mind about listing awards: what you need to do is to find some sources that meet the triple criteria of being independent, reliable, and containing significant coverage of the band: see WP:42. If you can't find these, then you can't establish that the band meets Wikipedia's crieria for notability, and anything at all that you do towards the draft will be a waste of time.

Once you have established notability (and made sure that the bulk of the article depends on sources which meet those criteria]], then you can add further information. But if an award is only documented on the organiser's database, and hasn't been reported on by a reliable secondary source, why should it go into an encyclopaedia article? ColinFine (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Football Transfers (and other questions)

Hello Teahouse staff!

I am a football/soccer fan and I would like to start making more edits on player transfers begin to heat up as the transfer window begins to close.

What is considered a "reputable source" and can be used to cite that a player made a move from "X" to "Y" club? The clubs themselves? Transfermarkt? Fabrizio Romano? I would like to make sure my sources are proper sources and not just rumour from a website or insider.

Also, I am currently in the process of cleaning up an article I am writing but I am busy with other work at the moment. How long can an article go inactive before it is archived? Thanks- A1139530 (talk) 15:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@A1139530: Your first point is probably better discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football; no doubt they have some guidelines or a FAQ; and maybe a newsletter. Draft articles are generally deleted after six months of inactivity, but if you created one you should get a talk-page notification before that happens; and you can request to have it undeleted at any time. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Reverting edits

Hello. I was just wondering: what is the correct way to revert edits on Wikipedia. For my two plus years editing Wikipedia, I have just been cut and pasting things, but I think it is about time to learn what the official method actually is! Many thanks in advance and kind regards, Roads4117 (talk) 19:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Roads4117. See Help:Reverting. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes that is just what I was looking for. Many thanks! Roads4117 (talk) 20:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

BLP on Talk pages?!!

I fully agree with and appreciate with the BLP policy as it applies to mainspace articles. But I'm seeing cases where editors seem to feel that this applies to the Talk pages associated with those articles, as well. Is this a policy change that an old-timer like me just missed, or are newer editors adding in restrictions of their own? Additionally / related, is it acceptable that editors simply remove talk comments? This seems to me to defeat the entire purpose of having a Talk page! How can we achieve consensus if some views are suppressed? --Eliyahu S ^Talk 12:32, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Eliyahu S Yes of course it applies to talk pages. Please see WP:BLPTALK. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps I should clarify. If the discussion doesn't impugn the Living Person, but rather disagrees with a topic,, is that still grounds for deleting? To give a perhaps less contentious example: in a bio page about a Wiccan, should a Talk comment that questions whether the Wiccan faith and classical witchcraft are synonymous, and hence should the word "witch" be used in a particular place, be simply deleted, and not discussed? (That wasn't the case, but is analogous.) --Eliyahu S ^Talk 14:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, BLP applies to every type of page on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 12:42, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

No that can't be right. It's about Biographies. You can say that it applies to "Living Persons" everywhere, but I'm not sure that's correct. Applying such an extreme interpretation would mean that we couldn't even discuss either side of a contentious issue unless all parties involved are dead, lest someone dispute anything said about anyone alive. In particular, there are many public figures who are involved in public disputes and we couldn't even mention the dispute under that reading. --Eliyahu S ^Talk 14:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

331dot is right. BLP applies to all pages on Wikipedia. You cannot make a contentious claim about a living person anywhere on this site - not without citing a proper source. Public figures involved in public disputes will nearly always have such sourcing available, so that case is not a problem. MrOllie (talk) 14:17, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

I have never needed to know this, but now that this discussion has made me wonder ... This also prohibits making a contentious claim about a random non-notable person whose name doesn't appear in any article, right? TooManyFingers (talk) 21:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Eliyahu S: Read the very first line at WP:BLP RudolfRed (talk) 20:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft Article Rejected

I am confused by the rejection of my Draft Article on Jeffrey Barrick: Draft:Jeffrey Barrick

I am a subject matter expert. I carefully cited external references to substantiate all points. The subject, Barrick, now leads a major experiment with extensive coverage on Wikipedia and in the news -- as one example, the leading journal science Nature reported when Barrick took over the experiment (as linked in my entry). The subject himself has authored many highly cited papers in Science, Nature, PNAS, etc. I didn't tout the fact, but merely cited those papers that are relevant to Barrick's research and discoveries, which I describe in the entry in neutral, scientific terms with links to relevant references.

The subject has also won awards and honors, including an NSF CAREER Award and others. The only substantive change I can see making would be to reduce the number of papers noted in the "Selected works" section. I could also perhaps remove a few of the subject's lesser known awards. Is this something you would advise?

Thank you for looking over this and, I hope, providing concrete advice. I believe this entry, as well as my first one published yesterday, are substantial, neutral, accurate, and enhance the content of this valuable website.

Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 02:26, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Your draft wasn't "rejected", it was declined. Rejected means stop, don't go on. Declined means it might be accepted with revision.

The draft looks as if it was written to praise the subject. It isn't written in a dispassionate neutral tone, with phrases like "rising through the faculty ranks" (meaningless, omit it), and "key mutations" (omit "key"). Wikipedia isn't a CV, so there is no need to list so many publications, they mean nothing to a general audience and give the appearance of puffery as a CV would have. That entire section can be removed without degrading the article.

Finally, see Wikipedia:Golden Rule and adhere to it. We need multiple sources about the person, not so many citations to his works. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, anachronist. I'll work on all those points. I would like to be clear that refereed articles in major scientific journals -- articles that that have been cited dozens and even hundreds of times -- are, in general, as reliable as any source that I know. They are not remotely like the "Not: tabloids, discussion boards, fansites, social media, or most blogs" cited as unreliable sources at the Golden Rule page.

I do have mixed feelings about removing the "Selected works" section. Many entries have them, and I think they are extremely useful to students looking to learn more about a topic. (And the works I selected are only a small fraction of Barrick's >100 papers, with an H-index of 54. So nothing like an actual CV.) Anyhow, I will cut the number way down and, if you insist, I'll remove them all. But doing so would, I think, make this encyclopedia entry less useful, not better.

Thanks again. Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 03:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I didn't mean to imply that sources written by him are unreliable. The problem is that they are primary sources; they are not independent of him. See WP:PRIMARY. We prefer WP:SECONDARY sources if possible. You say he (or his work) has received extensive news coverage. Be sure that coverage is cited.

You can have selected works. The problem is that section is far too long. As I said, this isn't a CV and your draft comes across as one. You're a subject matter expert, so that lengthy list of selected works may be meaningful to you, but you are not writing for an audience of subject matter experts. It isn't meaningful to anyone else. From my perspective (as someone with a scientific background in a different field) it just looks like an unnecessarily long list that could be summarized in a few sentences without mentioning any of those works. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:24, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks again Anachronistic. I think I've hit most or all of your points. I still list a few selected works, but not many. Many news stories cover the LTEE project (which is a clear focus of Barrick's work in the entry), so I'll try to copy some of those over in the days ahead, but I hope the article is close enough now. I've put a lot of effort into it, and I hope to do more entries in the weeks ahead for some other scientists in and near my field whose work is interesting, important, and deserves more attention. And having read many, many Wikipedia articles, and having written biographical and other entries for old-school subject-matter encyclopedias, I think this entry is solid. Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 04:12, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

That looks quite good. The last major task, before you click the 'resubmit' button in the pink banner at the top of the draft, is to convert those bare URLs into actual citations. See WP:CITE for instructions on using the citation templates. The templates {{cite journal}}, {{cite news}}, {{cite magazine}}, or {{cite book}} would likely be needed. Click on any of those template links I listed to see the instructions for those specific citations. Journal citations should have at least one author, title, publication date, journal name, volume, issue, and doi parameters. Newspaper and magazine parameters are similar but with the newspaper or magazine name in place of the journal name, and no volume, issue, or doi. Book citations would typically have a year instead of a date, the publisher name, and ISBN instead of DOI. Including the 'url' parameter isn't necessary with journal articles because the 'doi' parameter typically takes care of that, but is useful with the other citation types. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The draft looks promising, to me. I've made some minor tweaks. Some suggestions:

• Avoid phrases like "as well", that mean nothing and seem promotional.
• Don't use multiple citations for uncontroversial statements of fact. It gives the impression that you're trying to get away with something dodgy; or maybe just boost the reference count. But references are assessed on quality, not quantity.
• Cite sources properly, with bibliographical details, as for the first one.
• Avoid the word "recently". Wikipedia articles are permanent. Maproom (talk) 07:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to format references, as URLS are not proper. Of greater importance, most of refs 8-31 are just links to journal articles. As noted above, these add nothing to establishing notability. Delete all those refs. Retain text content if there are refs for what people have published ABOUT Barrick. David notMD (talk) 10:27, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Sometimes you need such citations to verify statements of fact. Even though the quantity of primary source references bothered me too, it seemed to me that removing them would invite {{citation needed}} tags. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Factsnfigurestoo We have special notability guidelines for academics, listed at WP:NACADEMIC. There are a number of possible criteria and the person only need to meet one of them. However, in the case of your draft, the issue seems to be that it is too much like a resume, so you should try to rework it to focus on the factors that make Barrick notable, which may mean cutting some material. You will find the WP:Citation expander helpful: it can take digital object identifiers and expand them into full citations and also helps with some URL. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

It no longer reads like a resume. The only real problem left is the bare URLs in the citations. After that's fixed, I think the draft is ready for review. I would approve it with the citations fixed. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:42, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks anachronist and everyone else. The citations are fixed. Someone cleaned up many of them, and I just fixed the last couple. I also addressed a few remaining details. I resubmitted it, and look forward to being approved. Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 19:21, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I took a look and to me, it does still look like a resume (however I am not a reviewer). With respect, what it lacks, to my eyes, are "external sources" that give commentary on the subject's work sufficient to indicate notability; if you want, take a look at one of my articles, perhaps J. Frederick Grassle for some of the ways that (in my view) I was able to indicate the subject's general notability when constructing that article (it did help that the subject was recently deceased, which can promote more external summaries of his career's work and its significance). All I am saying, really, is that if you can find external sources that talk about the subject and either paraphrase these or use short direct quotes, that will assist considerably in shifting your draft away from the "resume" style and more towards the type of encyclopedic entry that would be suitable for Wikipedia. I trust this is taken in the spirit it is intended: there is a "Wikipedia style", knowledge of which will certainly assist you in constructing more rather than less "acceptable" articles, which can sometimes be learned only by trial and error. Of course I do not claim that my cited article example is perfect and/or the last word on the subject, but no one has taken issue with it yet (plus most others that I have written, fingers crossed). Hope this helps and best regards - Tony Rees, Australia Tony 1212 (talk) 20:16, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps I'll try again when the subject dies in 40 years. /s Oh wait, I'll be dead then, too.

Seriously, the notability of the subject Barrick is justified by the many highly cited and high impact papers he has published that address demonstrably important topics, ones for which there are substantive Wikipedia pages. That's the currency of notability in science. Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 20:36, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Alright, I'm done, at least for now. Here and on the article page (where the same and different people are piling on) I've explained my position and bent over backwards to accomodate suggestions. All for naught. Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 21:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Many editors (the ones with responsible attitudes) are very reluctant to say what I'm about to say, but I sincerely think it may help you. You've misunderstood the main point because you've been working so much to prove the quality of the subject, when what's needed is to prove his fame. Not the kind of fame that would get him into the tabloids of course, but you need to show that major established trusted third parties published substantial material about him. For example, Einstein is easy because many major trusted sources have published major articles on him.

You have to show that your subject has become a field of study for big-name publishers, that THEY have picked up on his work – your job as editor is NOT to take on the task of demonstrating the quality of his work yourself. TooManyFingers (talk) 22:16, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The notability of a scientist is justified by their high impact papers (and books) that illuminate important topics, such as ones for which there are substantive Wikipedia pages. That's the currency of notability in science, and I provided abundant evidence of it in this case.

Journal articles (most of them, and all that are relevant here) have been reviewed by other experts -- third parties, and far more expert and reliable than the majority of other sources in news stories, etc. It's that demonstrated excellence of contributions that makes a scientist worthy of being discussed in an encyclopedia.

Wikipedia, alas, is extraordinarily inconsistent within the scientist category as well as between categories of important and unimportant people. Is a MLB baseball player that played 4 games 69 years ago famous? Worthy of being in an encyclopedia?

By the way, I came here to try to improve the site by proving expert content. And in the past, I made a $500 financial contribution to Wikipedia via the Wikimedia foundation. But it sure feels like this place has become too rigid and ossified. Too many rules, and too little thought. Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 22:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I replied to this topic earlier, giving suggestions that you appear not to have taken on board. By the way, Wikipedia articles are by no means limited to deceased persons as you imply in your comments, as a simple search will demonstrate. All you (or anyone) as to do is to demonstrate that one, two, or preferably more "external, reputable sources" (not just paper that cite his work, that happens hopefully throughout science) have commented on the notability in his field of the relevant person, for example for producing significant research that has had impact more widely than his own research team or institution, or has been used and perhaps built upon elsewhere in the world, by other significant users. That is all. If such sources do not exist, then maybe the subject is not ready for a Wikipedia article (yet). That is all I have to say on the subject, good luck. Tony 1212 (talk) 22:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I've bent over backwards answering concerns and revising repeatedly per concrete advice. A problem, in my experience here, is Wikipedians give contradictory advice, and they often don't seem to read the various replies and revisions. Good luck to you as well. Factsnfigurestoo (talk) 22:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Notifications?

Can I set up notifications to be alerted if any new entries are added to Category:Books with missing cover? I often work on adding new book cover images, but I don't know when new ones are added other than looking at the number grow. It would be helpful to know exactly which new books are added in need of book cover images and what letter they are under and the exact article title etc. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

If you go to that page you gave the link for, there's a star-shaped icon to click on. After you click it, the page will be placed onto your watchlist. When you visit your watchlist page, it shows whether any of the pages you're watching have been changed. You can click the star on almost any page, and keep track of as many pages as you like.

I hope that was what you needed. TooManyFingers (talk) 22:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I do not like the watchlist feature. Too many things get automatically added to it, so I never check that page. Is there no other way? Iljhgtn (talk) 22:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

There easily might be. I don't know, but I never tried. TooManyFingers (talk) 23:54, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

• Have you tried Wikipedia:Special:RecentChangesLinked?Moxy🍁 00:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Restore removed article

Hi,

I was blocked for a while, for which Shyaam Nikhil P. was moved from the main space I guess. Now I have been unblocked, so restore the article if possible. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 19:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I have un-deleted the article. Normally you would make such requests at WP:REFUND. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Got It. Thanks a lot. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 00:16, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

separate every VPN and ip address worldwide

Uncompress every VPN and ip address worldwide how to fix it and clear my name from the internet erase everything that I have done from the internet Re1Lucky365 (talk) 00:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

What question are you asking about Wikipedia? -- Hoary (talk) 00:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

When something has been put on the internet, there is no way to undo it. Tiny pieces may sometimes be removed, but most of it is going to be kept forever. TooManyFingers (talk) 00:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect Display Title

I've published my first article with the wrong display title. Is there a way to change it? Thank you. SH8989 (talk) 10:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

First, "Publish" means 'save'. Your only activity is at User:SH8989/sandbox. This is therefore an unsubmitted draft. If, in time, you submit it to Articles for Creation (AfC) for review and it is moved to mainspace, the reviewer will give it a correct title, i.e., the person's name. David notMD (talk) 10:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@SH8989: I have added a box with a Submit button to User:SH8989/sandbox. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Please do not submit yet. Some of your sections do not have references. For a living person, all content needs to be verified. Secondly, it is unlikely that this person meets the criteria for academics described at Wikipedia:Notability (academics). David notMD (talk) 12:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@SH8989 He might be notable based on his awards but you need to wikilink the articles (e.g. Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy) to show their signiicance and, most importantly, cite the sources which confirm these details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Mike. I'll check first whether he is notable and will then add all the wikilinks and cite sources. SH8989 (talk) 01:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi David,

thank you for all the info. I'll check the Wikipedia:Notability(academics) first and if I proceed, I'll add all required references. SH8989 (talk) 01:01, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! SH8989 (talk) 01:02, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

An editor acting oddly?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Not an issue for Teahouse/Questions. Referred elsewhere

 – The help desk does not deal with behavioral issues, WP:ANI does. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 01:09, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

A fairly new editor (now with around 40-50 edits) added some poorly sourced and potentially controversial material to a couple of articles and neglected to give meaningful edit summaries (just reused an unrelated edit summary from one of their earlier edits). I sent a message on their user talk page saying please give more accurate edit summaries so people will know what you did. The response I got back was very slow to arrive, and I couldn't tell from the response if they had even understood what I wrote to them. I observed them off and on for a little while, and this reuse of non-relevant edit summaries just continued, so I wrote to them again. Seemed better after that. BUT then this quite new, barely responsive, (and maybe even of questionable English literacy) editor jumped to resubmitting a recently declined article of a non-notable American physician, apparently without fixing any of the problems that got it declined. I went back to their talk page and (my action probably easily interpreted as rude) asked them if someone is paying them to edit. After several days they responded, but it was incoherent. I asked again, and nothing back so far.

I don't know what to do, if anything. I hope someone with relevant experience sees this and understands. TooManyFingers (talk) 23:35, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

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

Next move?

A bit silly, but: I'm stuck knowing what to do next in a content dispute with a specific editor; mostly, I think, because it's across a number of pages and they are fairly unresponsive. Here are some recent diffs: PCC556's change in March; my July restoration; article talk – Talk:Odo of Metz#Lead change; User talk:PCC556#July 2024. Other pages where we've interacted: Justacorps, Caravel, Frog (fastening). There's a kind of POV around Asian or non-Western cultural influences, or something(?!) See, for example, these edits: 1 violin; 2 vaquero; 3 Art Nouveau furniture; 4 tiara; 5 cast iron; and this, immediatlely reverted, but quite startling one.

My version(s) might be wrong, and of course I could just leave it, for other editors – if and when they see a problem. I don't see how this would be a matter for any of the ANI-type boards, either: There's no "slightly worrisome" noticeboard ...

I guess what I'm asking is what do you do when someone just won't engage? Just leave the poorly sourced or unsourced edits alone until more editors see them? A little advice would be appreciated; second opinions on whether I'm imagining the POV thing would be helpful, too. AukusRuckus (talk) 11:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@AukusRuckus: Please follow the process at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:25, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I was under the impression that I was following the process? This was just looking for sounding board, which I hoped would meet with some constructive suggestions. I had a rather upsetting encounter with a sock (not the case here) a while ago, which I let go on and on, and wanted to avoid being a lone voice again here (or alternatively have others point out I was being unreasonable, if that's the case). If it was inappropriate to ask here, I apologise.

The new contentious issue notification as a response was the least expected outcome. (Yes, I'm aware it does not imply that there are any issues with my editing.) AukusRuckus (talk) 00:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

That one you called "quite startling" DOES lead to "A Prayer for Our Soldiers", not to any valid information, and PCC556 was absolutely correct in removing religious spam. TooManyFingers (talk) 00:02, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough, I was unaware of that. I have not edited there. Thanks for the information. AukusRuckus (talk) AukusRuckus (talk) 00:04, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I was focused on the removal of the information, which is what I thought the ES was referring to, rather than the cited source. This absolutely should have been removed. Should the information have been removed with it, or an attempt to properly source it have been made? I don't know, not my area. Obviously a bad example of what I meant, although I think an argument could be made that it was slightly trigger happy. I'll get back in box now, since I'm clearly making a hash of things! AukusRuckus (talk) 00:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I deleted that source again. If you know a "clean" legitimate reliable place to see the information it was intended to point to, please add it where the other one used to be, that would be great. TooManyFingers (talk) 01:26, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I just took a quick look at the Art Nouveau example, and his edit summary explains that another editor has misread or misquoted the source material. He says nothing anti-Japan; he seems to be saying Art Nouveau did not adopt authentic Japanese methods, but rather used some Western-style cosmetic treatments to give a "sort of Japanese-ish look" to things. As far as I'm aware, this is true.

It's not impossible that he might be engaged in some kind of destructive scheme, but it doesn't look like it on the surface. TooManyFingers (talk) 01:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

How to suggest a creation of an article

Some of you may have heard about the EEE outbreak in Massachusetts, and I’m thinking that an article should be created about it given its intensity, severity, and longevity. However, I don’t know how to create or suggest an article (and even if I knew how to do the former, that might be a bit too much work for me alone at least), so if anyone could help me with how to suggest an idea for a new Wikipedia article, that would be greatly appreciated. LordOfWalruses (talk) 00:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Have you already got a list of articles about it that have appeared in reliable publications? That would be a great start. TooManyFingers (talk) 00:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

LordOfWalruses, there is already an article Eastern equine encephalitis which has existed since 2005. If you want to create an article about the recent outbreak, the right way to do that, is to edit the article Eastern equine encephalitis, and add a sentence or two to section Eastern equine encephalitis § United States, along with some citations to reliable sources. In time, should this story generate a flood of additional independent reports, then consider expanding the two sentences into a new subsection of a couple of paragraphs, perhaps to be called, "2024 Massachusetts outbreak", or similar. If the story snowballs so that there are almost too many sources to keep up with, and expanding the section any more than it already is would seem to be too much for the size of the article (currently, 28kb), only then would it make sense to break out that section into a new article. If and when that happens, please see WP:Summary style for how to do that, and since it looks like you haven't created an article before, see also Help:Your first article. I left you some additional tips at Talk:Eastern equine encephalitis#2024 Massachusetts outbreak. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 02:10, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Oblivion

Who do I talk to about filling for the right to be forgotten 70.129.63.193 (talk) 22:35, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

titled -- Hoary (talk) 22:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

There's no such right. For most editors, the best way to be forgotten is just to stop editing. For special cases, carefully read and digest Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing. -- Hoary (talk) 23:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Or are you asking about deleting an article, perhaps one about you or a person you know? David notMD (talk) 02:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hoary, the questioner is probably asking a general, internet-related question, and not one related to Wikipedia. This is most likely, given that this is their first or second career edit. The right to be forgotten is probably a better known issue in Europe than in most English-speaking countries, and there is such a right in some countries. post-ec: David notMD Mathglot (talk) 02:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation

There are now three articles on the topic of aliasing: Aliasing, Aliasing (computing), and now Aliasing (factorial experiments). They reference each other in their hatnotes. I have two questions:

1. Shouldn't the first of these be re-titled Aliasing (signal processing)? There is no reason that it should simply be called Aliasing, without a modifier, as though that application is the main meaning of the term. In point of fact, it is historically the second, and was probably influenced by the term in statistics (see Aliasing#Historical_usage).

2. Should there be a disambiguation page for the term Aliasing?

To whom should these questions be directed, and who makes the call? Johsebb (talk) 18:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Johsebb, the place these questions get decided at is usually WP:RM. You propose a move to the title you think is appropriate, other editors weigh in, and after a period of discussion the page is moved (or not moved) to whatever consensus is reached. I wouldn't open a move discussion for this, though - we prefer to avoid parenthetical disambiguation when possible, so if the topic currently at Aliasing is the main meaning of the term, it's correct that it doesn't have any disambiguator there. When there are only two or three possible meanings for a term, and one is the clear main topic, we usually don't create a disambiguation page, but rather sort it out with hatnotes like these articles do. The details on all this are discussed at WP:DAB.

If you read WP:DAB and think there's a good case to rename the articles, my advice would be to start a topic on the talk page at Talk:Aliasing, rather than immediately starting a move discussion. That way, you'll (hopefully) get some input from other editors who are familiar with the topic. -- asilvering (talk) 19:08, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I understand the desire to avoid disambiguation. I guess my only thought is that Aliasing is not the "main meaning" or the "clear main topic" of the term "aliasing" (nor is Aliasing (factorial experiments)).

I would be happy to start a topic at Talk:Aliasing, although my experience with talk pages is that they sit there indefinitely without attracting any attention. I would prefer to actually propose the move at WP:RM in order to subject it to editorial discussion. But if you feel that this step is to be avoided and posting a topic at Talk:Aliasing is more appropriate, I'll try that. Johsebb (talk) 03:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

If you get no attention, then you can go ahead and propose the move. I suggest asking on the talk page first mostly so that you're more effectively targetting "people who know about the topic" rather than also pulling "people who know a lot about article titling conventions, but not much about this topic". -- asilvering (talk) 04:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

I was actually going to go slow, but it appears that another user has already created Aliasing_(disambiguation). I'm not sure where this goes from here, and I think this is above my pay grade. Johsebb (talk) 13:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that was not helpful. I suppose now the best course of action is to start the RM discussion to sort this all out. -- asilvering (talk) 18:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Johsebb:

1. Yes.

2. Yes.

I've created Aliasing (disambiguation), but I suspect there is WP:NOPRIMARY, so that the article currently at Aliasing should be renamed Aliasing (signal processing), and the new disambig page repointed at it. Most of the hatnotes at the articles should be simplified, and probably just point to the Disambig page for other uses. Feel free to propose the move for #1; I'support such a move. Mathglot (talk) 09:38, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Aliasing (disambiguation)

Wikipedia Commons copyright forum. Try your questions there. If you repeat your question there, you might want to clarify what you mean by "errors and fake SVG" files. Good luck, Mathglot (talk) 08:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)P ,that's a lot of questions, and questions about the laws and copyright issues about images of various types would be better handled at the c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Mathglot (talk) 10:00, 25 August 2024 (UTC)   struck cruft meant for another section. Mathglot (talk) 17:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

I did not say anything about "errors and fake SVG" files, or laws and copyright issues. Was this meant for someone else? Johsebb (talk) 13:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Johsebb, I beg your pardon, I've struck that part of the message, which as you surmised, was a part of my response to another user, that somehow got pasted on to my response to you. Very sorry for the confusion.

Back to your Aliasing issue: I believe the new Aliasing (disambiguation) page will catch a lot of searches, and also the hatnote at the top of the current Aliasing page (which I agree should be renamed, to add parenthetical disambiguation to the title) can be simplified to refer to the disambig page. Mathglot (talk) 17:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I hadn't thought of replacing the hatnote, but presumably it should be done also on Aliasing (factorial experiments) and Aliasing (computing). If I'm to do this, I need to see an example of wording, although I'd prefer to leave this to someone with more experience. I'd also ask that someone else rename Aliasing (I'm not even sure how to go about that). Johsebb (talk) 20:57, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Johsebb:, I'm happy to take care of those items for you, but just so you know, there are disambiguation hatnote templates that provide disambiguation links and provide the wording for you, like {{Other uses}}, {{For}}, and {{About}}. The Aliasing article currently uses {{About}}, and it's possible we could stick with that one, pared down a bit, and linking to Aliasing (disambiguation) in the last term, or use one of the other ones. It's a bit of a judgment call, based on what would be the most useful to the reader, which, in turn, depends somewhat on the popularity of each of the different articles with that term. I would take a swag at it, and say that the current page (i.e., the signal processing one) is the most likely, but without quite being a clear winner with respect to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC—would you agree?—and in that case, the hatnote for Aliasing should be either {{For}} or {{Other uses}}, with only the link to Aliasing (disambiguation).

You are still a relatively new user, but not a brand new one, and part of the on-boarding as an editor is to begin to get familiar with some of the templates, and how to use them. If you feel up to it, why not have a look at the doc pages for {{For}} and {{Other uses}}, pick one that makes the most sense to you (or is easiest) for this situation, and try replacing the {{About}} template at the top of Aliasing with one of those templates, linking to the disambig page. Use the Preview button before hitting Publish, to see if the result looks the way you expect it to. WP:BE BOLD is part of policy, so don't worry about breaking anything; if you make a mistake (we all do!) someone else will undo your edit, or fix it. I encourage you to ahead and give it a try. If you get stuck, reply here, and I or someone will be here to help out.

As far as the rename, let's wait just a bit, to see if the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#Aliasing attracts any other feedback that might indicate another path. (And btw, you are welcome to take part there, if you wish.) If there is no further feedback there, can you {{ping}} me there (or here) in a couple of days as a reminder? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I gather that as a policy matter it's preferable to simply direct users to a disambiguation page rather than to specific articles (using About), as is now done. I'll play with this.

I don't really know that Aliasing (signal processing) is the primary topic. It does have a very active talk page, but Aliasing (factorial experiments) is very new and so it's hard to judge the relative likelihood of its being sought. Whether it has greater enduring notability or educational value is also hard to judge. I'll think about this. Johsebb (talk) 03:39, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Citing a copyvio?

Hi Teahouse, I've been working on improving an article and ran into a fun problem: one of the citations is to what we would consider a copyvio. The cited website has reproduced in full an article written in a local newspaper in the 90s. As far as I can tell, the local newspaper is not archived online, and the website's justification was "We're not certain whether the Citizen archives it's stories for later reference, so we're going to archive it here for further reference." Obviously the justification doesn't actually make it better, but it does suggest that finding the original could be difficult. Certainly my search has come up with nothing besides the site in question.

My question is - what to do here? I'm leaning towards trying to cite the original article; the paper's name, article title, and author are available (but not the day/month/year). It seems that the only way to read the original article is the copied text, though. Do I link it, even though they've reproduced the entire article? Does any policy cover this? StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:41, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I think this is covered by WP:LINKVIO TooManyFingers (talk) 02:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @TooManyFingers, my policy hunt failed to find that. Exactly what I needed. StartGrammarTime (talk) 06:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Where to request higher-level feedback on (user draft) article before move to mainspace

Hi Teahouse patrons! I have a draft article in my userspace on the death of Milton King that I'd love to get feedback and recommendations on before I move it to mainspace. I've written B- and C-class articles before, and this is more robust than that (though I'm sure the writing fails in some areas); ideally I'd like to push for GA at some point even. Is this still an AfC-type situation, or is there somewhere else I can go to request higher-level feedback aimed specifically at getting this future article to B- or GA-class? Many thanks. SunTunnels (talk) 04:11, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Don't send it through AfC! It's backlogged and you clearly already know how to write an article. Honestly, you're probably set to take this to GA already. I'm not seeing any red flags. -- asilvering (talk) 04:27, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@asilvering Thanks very much for the advice! Will do. No addition to AfC backlog here, heh. SunTunnels (talk) 04:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

By the way, WP:RATER thinks this is "B or higher" with a confidence of 93.3%. -- asilvering (talk) 06:53, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Writing article

Hello! I was wondering if someone could help me edit the A508 road article. I have been worked on it quite a lot since about June 2023, trying to make the page better, but, as I said in my previous comment, now this page is an AfD (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A508 road), I have obviously gone about it in the wrong way; I was trying to write it in a similar style to the A52 road article, but failed!! Therefore, even though I have been editing for over two years, this is my first article that I am (more or less) writing from stratch (in 2022 the article had only three sentences), so I think I need a little bit of help just to get me going. Any help will be much appreciated and many thanks in advance! Regards, Roads4117 (talk) 20:21, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Roads4117 Consensus was that the article be  Kept. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:57, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok, great! Even so, I still think if I don't get some help soon, then it may have a second nomination at AfD, and next time, it probably won't be so lucky. Roads4117 (talk) 07:32, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

A source to be checked

A user has recently cited "billboardmusicworld.com". It's on another Wikipedia, but I was hoping someone here could evaluate it, because I get a weird feeling about it. For example this link here: https://www.billboardmusicworld.com/speaker-boy-signs-agreement-with-sony-music-subsidiary-awal-and-announces-possible-ep/

It seems to me that it's claiming to be associated with Billboard (magazine) and possibly using their trademark. But I don't think it's associated with them. The website also shows their number of followers as 14M on Facebook, 14M on Twitter, and 3M on YouTube, but those link to the actual Billboard accounts. So is this a separate company , or a division of Billboard (magazine)? I also found "billboardworldmusic.com" 2607:F140:6000:8178:A87A:9DD0:F261:82A2 (talk) 03:59, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

IP editor. There's only one use of that website on the whole of en:Wikipedia, so I'd be very wary of it. You might get a more reasoned answer at WP:RSN. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:21, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

The domain name is registered through namecheap.com [4] - that's a red flag. billboard.com on the other hand is registered through networksolutions.com [5] Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

To clean or not to clean?

Heya. I was wondering if this page qualifies for cleanup as I believe it may be a violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY..? I'm not sure, that's why I'm asking here! Opinions are much appreciated. Scuffedsherm (talk) 12:04, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Scuffedsherm I would say it certainly could do with some TLC. For a start, it has far too many external links in the body text, which is usually frowned upon. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:26, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Sorry for asking, but what's TLC? Scuffedsherm (talk) 06:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Scuffedsherm just "tender loving care". Sorry, I may be showing my age by using outdated acronyms. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

That's fine, thanks for your reply! Scuffedsherm (talk) 11:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Close the Duplicated RfCs

Dear Wikipedians,

Could you please officially close the two RfCs below that have the same purpose: to decide on a new Trump profile picture?

1. RfC: Trump infobox photo 2. RfC: Trump photo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2024_United_States_presidential_election#Alternative_options%3F Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:52, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Goodtiming8871, welcome to the Teahouse. Closure requests should go to WP:Closure requests. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 13:34, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind advice. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Where is the Infobox picking up this dead web site?

Hi. I am confused (not for the first time, and probably not the last!) Looking at the article Ditmar Award, the Infobox shows a link to a dead website (splints.customer.netspace.net.au/ditmar1024res/calldit1024.html). I found a usable archive at web.archive.org/web/20240404220132/http://splints.customer.netspace.net.au/ditmar1024res/calldit1024.html. So I tried to fix the error, but when I opened the editor I found that the code for the Infobox does not have a website listed at all. So I am at a loss to see where it is picking that up from. I looked for an {{official website}} entry in case it was picking up from there somehow - but it does not have that either. Can somebody please put me out of my misery, and tell me where I need to fix this? Gronk Oz (talk) 06:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: It appears it's coming from the Wikidata entry (wikidata:Q906455#P856). Updating it there should change the infobox here. Tollens (talk) 06:48, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Tollens: - ah, thanks! Now I have a follow-on question, beacuse I am not familiar with how Wikidata works. The Wikidata entry for "Ditmar Award" says it is "described by" the Science Fiction Awards Database at www.sfadb.com/Ditmar_Awards. And when I check there, it lists the old web site. So my question is - do I somehow need to get it updated on that Database site, or just manually update it in Wikidata (so they will then be out of synch)?--Gronk Oz (talk) 07:05, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

The "described by source" property is essentially the equivalent of a "Further reading" section here on Wikipedia – it is just a link to somewhere else with some information. You can directly change the link in Wikidata, no automated process will notice the discrepancy. Tollens (talk) 07:13, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Tollens: - Sorry to be a pain, but I am still having trouble. I tried just over-writing the old Wikidata entry with the archive address but it gave the following error message:

Could not save due to an error. The save has failed. Note: How to update the official website:

• If the item has a new site, add an additional statement with preferred rank. How to set preferred rank? See Help:Ranking#How_to_apply_ranks.
• If a website is no longer valid, you could also:

 - qualify the URL with end time (P582). If you don't know the exact date, use the year or "unknown" as date
 - add the qualifier archive URL (P1065) to link to the former website at web.archive.org

Do not delete or replace the former URL.

So it looks like I need the last option, to "add the qualifier archive URL (P1065)..." but I have no idea what that is asking me to do. Do you have any idea how to do that?--Gronk Oz (talk) 09:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz I think you're right. You can add the qualifier by clicking "edit" next to the current official website and then clicking "add qualifier". Then enter "P1065" in the new "Property" box and choose "Archive URL" from the single-item list that pops up. Then another input field will appear and you can put the archive URL in there and click "publish". --bjh21 (talk) 10:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bjh21:@Tollens: - Thanks, that seems to have worked to update the Wikidata entry. But the Wikipedia page has not changed as a result... Is there some trick, to make it pick up the archive URL from Wikidata instead of the obsolete one?--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:04, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Why don't you just add the archive URL in the |website= field of the infobox? That will override whatever's coming from Wikidata (of which I'm not a fan). Since the URL is doubtless rather long, you should probably give it a name, such as "[URL Official site (archived)]" to avoid expanding the width of the infobox. Deor (talk) 14:45, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done @Deor:@Bjh21:@Tollens:- Thanks for all your help. As Deor suggested, I hard-coded it. It is still very wide, so expands the Infobox a lot - for some reason, when it came from Wikidata it would wrap in the Infobox, but now the same text doesn't wrap. But I think it will be okay.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:08, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

And thanks to Deor, who fixed the overly wide infobox by using the {{official website}} template there instead.--Gronk Oz (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Archiving a Chat at on Talk Page

Since I do not know how to archieve a chat on my talk page can someone who knows do an automated archiving of the chat on my talk page.Thanks. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 02:32, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

See User:lowercase sigmabot III and follow the instructions. See the talk pages of other active users for examples. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Can you check to see if I did it right at my talk page. Thanks. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 04:16, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello Cookiemonster1618!

I fixed the archive for you by following the instructions over at Help:Archiving (plain and simple). Have a nice day! Polygnotus (talk) 05:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Cookiemonster1618: I replaced Polygnotus' fix (edit conflict) with a new template and archive box. Either way has the same effect. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:10, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok thank you so much. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 13:21, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

will the conversation be removed from my talk page? Or can I remove it now? Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 13:22, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The bot runs every night. However, that first section may not get archived because it doesn't end with a dated signature, it ends with a closing tag. So you may want to move that to Archive1 yourself. In the archive box on the right of your talk page, click on the "create" link to create it, then paste the first section into it, and remove it from the talk page. The settings currently are to archive things that are 180 days old. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't see the archive box on the right side of my page? Do i click the edit button and the archive template you guys added at my talk page?. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 19:54, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you using a mobile device? If so, I cannot advise because I use only laptop or desktop computers. On a mobile device, you might try enabling the desktop view in the browser, rather than the mobile view.

The archiving templates are already installed on your talk page. If you look at it with the source editor, you will see the template {{User:MiszaBot/config}} and below that the template {{Archive box}}. The first one instructs the archive bot what to do, and the second one is a box that will contain the links to your archives. This box is automatically updated by the bot.

If you are using a laptop or desktop, go to User talk:Cookiemonster1618. On the right at the top is a beige-colored box with the title "Archives". Below that title is a message "no archives yet (create)". Click on "create". ~Anachronist (talk) 21:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok thank you so much for your help I was able to archive it on my laptop. Have a great day and thanks for your help once again, I really appreciate it. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Need help with deletion of article

rather new to deletionist articles, i would like help with adding the 2023 Halla Airlines Embraer Brasilia crash crash to the AFD: Places and Transportation category, could anyone help? Lolzer3000 (talk) 15:52, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Lolzer3000, WP:TWINKLE can automate this for you. I'd suggest reverting the edits you've made so far and then just letting twinkle handle it. -- asilvering (talk) 16:36, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Archiving multiple citations at once

Hi

I wanted to know if there is any tool or bot that allows one to archive multiple sources (citations) in a Wikipedia article at once/on one click?

Thanks.

Ben | he/him (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Ben0006, you're looking for WP:IABOT. -- asilvering (talk) 16:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Published Page not showing up

Hi there,

I published a page about two months ago entitled Opera Orlando and the page is still not showing up on Wikipedia. Any idea why that is? OR do you know whom I can contact to find out why it is not showing up?

Many thanks for any help!!

Burchtri (talk) 10:58, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Burchtri: Your page is at User:Burchtri/sandbox. You would need to follow the process at WP:AFC to submit it for review and publication. But before it will pass, it needs more citations, per WP:42. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:01, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello. If you are referring to the content of your sandbox- it is "published" in that it is on Wikipedia's computers, but it is not part of the encyclopedia. New accounts cannot directly create articles, you need to use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft for review. I would note thst your draft is unlikely to be accepted, as it is almost completely unsourced.

Be aware that "Publish changes" does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia", it means "make this visible on Wikipedia's computers". It should be understood to just mean "save". 331dot (talk) 11:02, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Burchtri: Your draft is not ready to be submitted to AfC for review as it has no valid references. Also, your "Own work" photographs of actors during productions may be a copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 16:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Editing "protected to prevent vandalism" page

Hi there,

How can information be edited on a "protected to prevent vandalism" page? The nationality doesn't match either the information about the person's life or work.

Aleksandra_Ekster

Will appreciate any help.

Whataheck (talk) 15:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Pages that are protected because of vandalism can usually be edited by semi-confirmed users (users with 10 edits and 4 days of registration time), but sometimes the bar to edit is raised to extended-confirmed (users with 500 edits and 30 days of registration time) if semi-protection isn't enough. You can also make an edit request if you see something that needs to be changed, but keep in mind that those requests need reliable sources unless it's a minor edit. — BerryForPerpetuity (talk) 15:21, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. That's helpful. Whataheck (talk) 16:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Adding to that, consider earlier discussions like Talk:Aleksandra_Ekster#Nationality_attribution. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Seen that. Thanks. Whataheck (talk) 16:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Where to propose this category reform?

Thanks to perusing WP:PetScan several minutes ago while researching GAs/FAs with "Anthologies" as a parent category, I'd like to make a proposal that puts printed, literary collections into a new subcategory. (Given that the current lineup also lumps in music-related and audiovisual material as well...) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 10:36, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Slgrandson: Very random thanks, however welcome! Now that WP:Teahouse is not to propose, it is for new editors to ask questions. You may like to see Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) or talk page of WP:PetScan if tis solely related to that. Cheers, ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 11:23, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Is there any reason not to just create the subcategory? I relied on WP:BRD to create Category:East of Eden (novel) within Category:Novels by John Steinbeck. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:04, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Page that should perhaps be renamed

Hello, I would have a modification to request on the article Aurélie Nemours. I do not know where to place this kind of request. Kind regards Lekselle (talk) 17:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

You can try asking at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests and simply link to what you've already written at Talk:Aurélie Nemours#Accent on the letter e. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:06, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Lekselle (talk) 18:23, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Photo help

Hello,

I read your article regarding how to provide a licensed photo for others to update the Wikipedia page dedicated to me. The image can be found here:

https://www.facebook.com/share/aNsmVcy2JPh8Vnfv/?mibextid=xfxF2i

My Wikipedia page currently features a photo that is nearly 5 years old. I wanted to provide a more current option. Your article said I could post this update here for others to see and potentially assist. My Wikipedia page is:

Chris Ulmer

Thank you for the information and I hope I did this correctly. Please let me know if there's anything else I need to do. Florida1103 (talk) 18:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I forgot to mention that the photo is a selfie I took. Florida1103 (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, @Chris. Welcome to the Teahouse. You have correctly supplied an image on your FB page with the right licence which we need for someone to upload that photo to Wikimedia Commons. All you need to do is not remove the licence text! To help you out, I'll copy and upload it to Commons in the next few minutes for you to save you a job. How's that? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:59, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

That sounds amazing. Thank you for your help! Once it's on Wikipedia Commons will it be utilized on my page pretty quickly or does it just depend on if someone chooses to make the change? I'm totally new to Wikipedia and appreciate your assistance. Florida1103 (talk) 19:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Florida1103 I've just uploaded your photo to Commons and then inserted it into the article about you. So you're all sorted! See Chris Ulmer.

Should you ever in the future feel the need to get changes made, you can always make an 'edit request' on the article's talk page. See WP:EDITREQUEST for guidance how to do this - it draws the attention of editors who will assess your request and make the necessary change (or decline it), as appropriate. If you intend never to edit again, you need do nothing more. But, if you do plan to make edits, you obviously would have a conflict of interest. We then ask editors to make a declaration on their user page as to that conflict. See WP:COI for guidance. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:19, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

You are awesome! Can't thank you enough for your help and all of the information. Florida1103 (talk) 19:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

JOËL (singer) Article

Hello! I had a question regarding an article i recently finished writing. I just submitted one of my first ever full articles as a draft, but it got declined. I was wondering if any of you could tell me how i should modify my article so it does get accepted? I understand that claims made on Discord typically don't get accepted, but Joël has shared many of the details i mentioned in the article elsewhere as well, and they align consistently and perfectly with his public persona (and the details he shared). He has openly talked about his experiences, like growing up in the forests like Aurora Aksnes, his admiration for certain artists, his childhood, and his goals in various digital interviews and social media platforms. He seems to be very transparent about his past and present, making it highly unlikely that he's not being truthful. In my perspective. I would appreciate any advice on how to properly cite these sources and structure the article to meet Wikipedia's standards!

Draft:Joël Galliard

(Plus, release information about his debutsong, i couldn't find anywhere else but social media like SoundCloud and Spotify.) (All of the other information was taken from his own shared photos, posts, and messages on various platforms, the most recurring one being Discord, specifically a Discord Server named 'Mothership' [a popular fan server for artist AURORA]). Plopperdeplop12345 (talk) 00:34, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Plopperdeplop12345, you've provided information that is verifiable, which is good. But what you're missing is any evidence of his notability. We want references from secondary sources for this, not just statements the subject has made. See WP:BIO. -- asilvering (talk) 00:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

What's missing is for you to quote big media outlets who write featured articles about him, where they say he is already famous and already popular. TooManyFingers (talk) 00:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

TooManyFingers, reliable, disinterested sources do not have to be "big media outlets". Neither fame nor popularity is necessary. -- Hoary (talk) 00:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Strictly you are absolutely right. Yet the misunderstanding persists and persists that simply providing true information is somehow the key, and while my words are not strictly correct, they do give at least a reasonably correct (and corrective) impression – something that years and years of strictly correct explanations have consistently failed to convey. TooManyFingers (talk) 01:04, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

That's the issue, he's a very new artist; he hasn't had any reviews, interviews, or any other articles yet. All of the references come from his own pages, and his chats in a Discord server named Mothership (which i mentioned earlier). There aren't any other sources or articles about him yet, and Wikipedia is the only website i know of where i could permanently put in claims with prove to back those claims up (again, his own messages and pages). Plopperdeplop12345 (talk) 01:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry @Plopperdeplop12345, in that case, he doesn't meet our notability guidelines, so we won't publish an article on him. -- asilvering (talk) 01:27, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I understand. Plopperdeplop12345 (talk) 01:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Plopperdeplop12345, it sounds like you have a case of WP:TOOSOON - it's entirely possible he'll become notable, and if you make a small edit to your draft every six months it will be ready to go if/when he does meet the guidelines. Even adding/removing a space or full stop counts as a small edit, but of course you could take the opportunity to search for any new information on him and reassess whether it's time to submit. You'll get a warning at the five-month mark for your draft, so take that as the time to make an edit and keep the draft active. Fingers crossed he gets noticed and notable soon! StartGrammarTime (talk) 02:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey, thank you! I never knew the five-month mark by the way haha. Plopperdeplop12345 (talk) 03:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

From a note on the draft, this appears to be an attempt at an article about yourself. See WP:AUTO for why the rarely works. David notMD (talk) 02:48, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Huh? No, this is not an article about myself. Plopperdeplop12345 (talk) 03:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

What note on the draft? Again, i am not writing an article about myself. Plopperdeplop12345 (talk) 03:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Quoted from an edit summary in October of last year by user JoelDeKabouter on an article which was then called Kabouter Plop but which is now called Studio 100:

I dedicated a significant amount of time to thoroughly revise the wiki page, incorporating reliable references and embedding relevant links. The majority of the content present in this English rendition of the article has been meticulously crafted and translated by me, Joël Galliard. This undertaking was a labor-intensive effort. There is still alot of missing info, so any help would be highly appreciated.

These "Plop"s and "Joël Galliard"s and "Kabouter"s seem to be proliferating on Wikipedia somehow.

(The "dedicated, thorough, and meticulous" edit by Joël Galliard/JoelDeKabouter was reverted because it contained no reliable references.) TooManyFingers (talk) 05:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

The draft starts with "Notes to admins: writing references in here was a pain, as they somehow cloned themselves haha. Nothing to worry tho, i can fix it when this article gets accepted. JOËL (singer)" How is that not you? David notMD (talk) 07:26, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I think the OP meant "JOËL (singer)" to be the title of their new article and so placed it at the top, as I've seen some other new folks do; they weren't using it as a signature to their prior message. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 13:53, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

That makes sense. David notMD (talk) 16:48, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that is what i meant. Sorry for the confusion! I am indeed a new wikipedian haha Plopperdeplop12345 (talk) 20:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

removing extended protection

It looks like a new editor has removed the extended protection on Tim Walz's page, diff here, saying "deleted the padlock - let the silliness begin." I don't know anything about how these protections get set or removed, but I suspect that it's not something for a new editor to be fiddling with, especially not with that kind of comment, and I wanted to check whether I should revert it. In fact, I don't understand how a new user was able to edit that page if it was protected. Thanks FactOrOpinion (talk) 20:48, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@FactOrOpinion Removing the padlock icon doesn't actually unprotect the page. Fortunately, only administrators can do that. The page is still protected. Cremastra (talk) 20:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I hadn't realized that it was just for the padlock icon. Thanks! FactOrOpinion (talk) 20:59, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging this, @FactOrOpinion! The page was protected at the extended-confirmed level for a while, and that recently expired. Rather than dropping back down to the semi-protected level, it became unprotected. A bot would have removed the padlock icon shortly, but that user did it first. It's hard to tell whether their intentions were just to reflect the page's protection status or if they thought they were unprotecting it. I have re-applied semi-protection now, and the bots will re-apply the icon shortly. (Someday the icons may be applied automatically, which will be nice.) Sdkb ^talk 21:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for that additional explanation, FactOrOpinion (talk) 21:08, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I've asked the editor (who incidentally first edited in 2019). -- Hoary (talk) 22:25, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Question About IRC

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

---

I am currently a user who is blocked indefinitely on the Japanese Wikipedia. And now, editing the conversation page is also prohibited. Currently, I'm trying to ask someone to unblock the talk page with the free browser version of IRC, but it doesn't work. Every time I log in to IRC, the comments I wrote before that disappear. I looked at the guide on how to use it, but it hasn't been solved. In addition, it is currently not possible to see the past log. I can only rely on this English page anymore, so I decided to ask a question here. I understand very well that I am a sinful person, and I will try not to make comments excessively even after the conversation page is released. If you are familiar with it, please give me some advice. Thank you. チューボー (talk) 14:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

We are unlikely to be able to help you troubleshoot your IRC client. Fortunately, the guide to appealing blocks says that you can also use the Japanese mailing list. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 14:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

The mailing list is too depopulated, and the hope of cancellation is low... チューボー (talk) 14:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I would be very happy to ask users who have used IRC. Also, maybe it's affecting the fact that I'm using the free browser version now? チューボー (talk) 15:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

There are users who normally use IRC to achieve cancellation in the same way, so I understand that something is wrong. Anyway, it's a situation where I can't find any hope for the mailing list anymore. チューボー (talk) 15:03, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Upon reviewing the archives, I can see that the mailing list is indeed dormant. My only other suggestion would be to try using a different client and internet connection. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 15:28, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll talk about the IRC malfunction, so I'd be happy if you could give me some advice.

I'm sorry for being so persistent, but in order to do something about my place, I have no choice but to get some advice here. Originally, it was because I repeated inappropriate behavior in the Japanese version, and I think it's a really brazen behavior. To be specific about what kind of trouble is occurring, first of all, I succeeded in logging in to IRC, but I don't know how to look at the past log, and every time I log in again after browser back, the message I posted in the past suddenly disappeared, and only "〇〇 participated in this" is displayed on the top screen. There is no one using the Japanese mailing list anymore, so I have no other means but IRC. I will reflect on my past behavior and definitely change the problems of the reason for the block, such as the lack of courtesy in the future. I feel that the fact that I'm asking a series of questions here is exhausting the community, but it's a really desperate situation... Could you please tell me the solution to the problem of IRC? チューボー (talk) 15:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Chupo. I know nothing about IRC. Perhaps there is something on WP:IRC that will help? ColinFine (talk) 19:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it.Thank you very much. チューボー (talk) 21:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I want to know the probability that a user who has been indefinitely blocked due to a scandal will be reinstated.

 Courtesy link: WP:Teahouse § Question About IRC

I haven't used the English version much, so I don't know, but I'd like to know how many users have been indefinitely blocked on English Wikipedia in the past, and then successfully persuaded other users to return after requesting the ban be lifted. Sorry for the silly question, but I've been indefinitely blocked on the Japanese Wikipedia under the name "Second Generation Chance Two," and as you can see, I'm in an extremely hopeless situation, as I can't even use the talk page. That's why I decided to ask this question. I'd like to hear from people who have dealt with many users who have been indefinitely blocked. チューボー (talk) 23:05, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure anyone will be able to give you an actual figure. In any case, it would probably underestimate the possibility of having an indefinite block lifted, since most people who are indeffed aren't trying to get their blocks removed. If you leave for a while, then come back later and apologize, you're quite likely to get a second chance. However, you really should not be using multiple accounts at the same time, especially when blocked. See WP:SOCK. -- asilvering (talk) 23:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry. My current account was the first one I made for the English version, long before "Chance Two II."

So, just because I'm using different accounts for the Japanese and English versions, will I be subject to being arrested for using multiple accounts?

Can I avoid this by adding the words "This is the same as Chance Two II. I will no longer be using this account" to my "Chubo" account and then logging in on the English version under a new name "Chance Two II"? > チューボー (talk) 23:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

A block on the Japanese Wikipedia isn't a block on the English Wikipedia. If your Japanese Wikipedia username is a global account, you are not globally blocked and you can still edit other Wikipedias. See if your blocked username on the Japanese Wikipedia works here. It is never a good idea to create new accounts after being blocked. However, it isn't uncommon to use different accounts on different Wikipedias, as long as you don't have more than one account on the English Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't create a new account, personally, but you can if you want to. If you do that, you'll want to abandon all of your old accounts. The important thing is that you're editing under only one account, not which account you use to do that. Making a note about your abandoned accounts on your user page to be up-front is a good idea. Don't use any account to evade a block or ban - so, for example, don't log on to Japanese wikipedia and start editing with this account, or you'll probably be blocked on ja-wiki on this account too. Don't repeat whatever behaviour caused you to get blocked on ja-wiki on any other language wikipedia, and no one else will have any reason to block you here or anywhere else. -- asilvering (talk) 23:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both. I'm going to throw away this account and log in to the English version as "Second Generation Chance Two." チューボー (talk) 23:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) User:チューボー, the usernames you quoted do not exist. When asking questions here, please use a wikilink to link them, or if you don't know how to do that, please spell the pagename exactly as it appears, whether here, or on Japanese Wikipedia. For example, there is no such user on Japanese Wikipedia as ja:Second Generation Chance Two (talk · contribs), and there is no Chubo (talk · contribs) account here at English Wikipedia. So, please be specific about what you are referring to. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Chubo is the account they're using right now, チューボー. I haven't gone looking for the others. -- asilvering (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but there was a problem because I used Google Translate. "二代目チャンストゥー" exists in the Japanese version. チューボー (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks for that; yes, user ja:二代目チャンストゥー (talk · contribs) exists there, and from your Japanese user Talk page^{[in English]} I can see that you are blocked there, and lack talk page access. However, you are still allowed to appeal your block there, and the instructions are given how to do that. Mathglot (talk) 00:15, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I have two options, "IRC" and "mailing list", but the latter hasn't been used at all for the last few years, so by process of elimination I have no choice but to use IRC.

But there aren't that many people on IRC either, and I'm not sure if anyone will bother me since I've caused a lot of problems in the past... チューボー (talk) 00:43, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@チューボー, Well, whether if the IRC is that active or not, the Japanese Wikipedia and the English version of Wikipedia are different so you will have appeal your block with either of those choices given, as the English Wikipedia can't do anything about it.

In courtesy in Japanese: ここでは何もできませんので、日本版の方で控訴しないといけないです。 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 01:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Since even conversation pages are prohibited in the Japanese version, I had no choice but to seek advice through the foreign language version. チューボー (talk) 01:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Also, "Chubo" is translated into Japanese as "チューボー". チューボー (talk) 00:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much to everyone for your valuable opinions. チューボー (talk) 01:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I was unreasonably blocked on IRC, and I felt like I was being tricked.

I am a Japanese person who was blocked indefinitely on the Japanese Wikipedia, and I previously asked a question about IRC.

Since then, I have been successful in IRC and was able to talk to a user who I believe has the authority to block others, but as a result, that user has also blocked me from IRC #Wikipedia-ja.

At first, I briefly explained why I was blocked and what I would do after unblocking the conversation page, and added, "Please do."

In response, the user did not give any specific reason why he could not allow me, and simply refused, saying that there was nothing I could do on this IRC at the moment, given my history.

After that, when I made excuses again, the user further told me to "come back in a few years" and "leave."

So I asked, "What specifically is the reason why you cannot release me?" The user must have gotten fed up with me, because he blocked me without any warning. The individual user messaging function was not blocked, so I asked the user "Why did you block me?" and "Did I do something that deserves blocking?", but the user ignored me. I thought that was strange, but then I found out that the user had disappeared from Libera.chat.

So does this mean I was tricked? I'm sorry for being a bit persistent, but even if I was tricked, I'm very curious as to why such a user had the authority to block. Or is it just a stupid assumption that I was tricked? I'd really appreciate your thoughts on this, whether you're familiar with IRC or not. チューボー (talk) 11:11, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@チューボー This is the English Wikipedia. We cannot help you with any issues regarding the Japanese Wikipedia. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:37, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

As I said before, I am currently blocked from Japanese Wikipedia and cannot even edit talk pages. This is an extremely urgent situation, so please understand that...??? チューボー (talk) 12:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

We understand it. But there's nothing we here at English Wikipedia can do about it. If I could read Japanese (I can't) and really wanted to help, I might go to Japanese Wikipedia and try to find out why you were blocked there. But I still wouldn't have access to what happened on IRC. Maproom (talk) 13:27, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

If even IRC has been blocked, there's no way to legally return... Should I just give up? チューボー (talk) 23:06, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

If you were an editor of the English Wikipedia and had gotten a response like that here, I would advise you to "give up" temporarily. We sometimes advise editors to wait six months between unblock requests. That said, I am not familiar at all with the policies of the Japanese Wikipedia. As others already told you, there is nothing we can do here to assist you. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 13:36, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Maproom, no need to read Japanese; see the superscript translate link in my 00:15, 23 August post above. Mathglot (talk) 02:25, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

It seems the only way to get back on Wikipedia is to violate the rules.

I am completely stuck. My talk page, email, IRC, everything is blocked. If this continues, I will probably never be able to return to the Japanese Wikipedia in the next 60 or 70 years of my life.

I'm sure you're not familiar with the Japanese Wikipedia, but please tell me if I should give up completely. チューボー (talk) 23:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Why were those things blocked? TooManyFingers (talk) 23:44, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

My talk page and email were blocked because my lack of literacy was revealed, including my inability to tolerate provocation.

As for IRC, I really don't understand what's going on, and I don't understand why I was blocked. チューボー (talk) 23:52, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, チューボー. We cannot help you with the Japanese Wikipedia, but if you think that "violating the rules" is the way to get reinstated, then you misunderstand the situation. When I read your English Wikipedia talk page, I see repeated warnings about problematic behavior. Administrators are much more willing to unblock an editor who is editing productively on another language version than to unblock an editor who is causing problems on another language version. So, your first step is to stop breaking rules and stop creating problems. Read WP:Standard offer and conduct yourself accordingly. Read WP:Unblock Ticket Request System. Japanese Wikipedia probably has a similar process. Cullen328 (talk) 23:53, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm saying that I can't carry out that process because the talk page is blocked. チューボー (talk) 23:58, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@チューボー, the process on ja-wiki can be done by email. But I would really advise you not to try. Leave the place behind for a while. No one is going to think you've reformed if the disruption you caused is so recent. -- asilvering (talk) 00:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I am also prohibited from sending wikimail, and one of the reasons for my block level increase was for sending wikimail to an unspecified number of people. チューボー (talk) 00:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I reiterate that the best action for you to take here is inaction. -- asilvering (talk) 00:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

So contribute to articles (and not merely talk pages such as this) within English-language Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 23:56, 26 August 2024 (UTC) Now that, prompted by Nick Moyes, I look at your past contributions, I realize that we don't want any more of them, or anyway none that are similar to those you have already made. -- Hoary (talk) 00:10, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@チューボー You appear to be editing under a different account name than that which you claim is blocked on ja-wikipedia. So it's impossible to suggest what you need to do. Looking at your past contributions under this account name, you do appear to think it's OK to add your own personal view of a topic. (Example) This is a huge "No-No" here. DO NOT DO IT!!!

You've ben warned about this many times. You must never, ever insert your own views on a topic. Everything needs to be sourced to a Reliable Source. I have no experience of IRC, so can't advise on that area. If you are not willing to add content based only upon good quality sources, then, yes, it is time to give up editing Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:00, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

They're ja:User:二代目チャンストゥー. Previously at the teahouse here: [6]. -- asilvering (talk) 00:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I have no intention of making foolish edits like that again, and I am currently in the process of seriously reading the Japanese version of the guidelines.

It seems that the problem I'm facing now is not so much the poor quality of my edits, but rather a lack of courtesy towards other users. チューボー (talk) 00:39, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

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

Digital tattoo

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

---

I'm the same person who asked the question before. As I said before, I have been indefinitely blocked on the Japanese version for various reasons, including a lack of etiquette and making my password public. These will become digital tattoos, but I am worried about how much of an impact this "indefinite block" will have on things like job hunting. I think a large part of my failure was probably due to my own immaturity, so I would be happy if the impact is minimal... チューボー (talk) 23:06, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

We cannot help you with the Japanese Wikipedia or topics not related to Wikipedia. Please stop posting about your block. RudolfRed (talk) 00:03, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

This is the English Wikipedia, so we cannot handle requests on the Japanese Wikipedia. Most employers probably don't care about who gets blocked from Wikipedia that much so you're probably good. CharlieEdited (talk) 00:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

In coutresy. There is an oversight on the Japanese Wikipedia. See: Wikipedia:オーバーサイトの方針.

Once again, this is the English Wikipedia so we cannot do anything about your block on the Japanese Wikipedia. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 00:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

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

A Draft and a Mainspace article having the same title.

I've noticed that there is Draft:National Management Committee of the United Party for National Development and there is also National Management Committee of the United Party for National Development (both have the same title & the same author). Now that I have noticed this, should I simply redirect the Draft to the Mainspace article, considering that the only difference between them is that the Mainspace article cites a "political party constitution" and has less paragraphs & considering that the Draft was once submitted and rejected? GeographicAccountant (talk) 18:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I think avoid doing that; the draft probably needs to be deleted, not redirected. TooManyFingers (talk) 22:16, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks. GeographicAccountant (talk) 00:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Uploading an image of an election diagram I made for my sandbox page

Hello. I want to upload an image of a parliament diagram I made (using the Commons template for election diagrams) based on the results of a game of a mod to the Campaign Trail (mod here, mod showcase here, browser game I played here.) I want to use the sandbox page to help me practice potentially editing image pages in the future. Are images uploaded chiefly for sandbox pages allowed on the English Wikipedia? Thanks. CharlieEdited (talk) 00:02, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

If no claim is being made for "fair use", then files for eventual use within en:Wikipedia should really be uploaded directly to Commons. Now, can these images "be realistically useful for an educational purpose"? ("Educational" surely means "educational for the readers of Wikipedia, Wikiquote, Wikiversity, or whatever", not just "educational for the uploader".) I can't comment further as I don't understand your description of your proposed image. (Are you proposing to create an article about this game? I see that there exists Campaign Trail: The Game of Presidential Elections, a feeble article about a board game that I imagine is unrelated.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:19, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I am uploading the image so I can put it on my sandbox page to practice editing. I used the parliament maker to make a parliament based on one of my sessions of the web game (the web game is unrelated to the article you put, yes.) The actual content of the image itself is mostly irrelevant and the main discussion here is about uploading images exclusively for your sandbox page. I should have worded it better. CharlieEdited (talk) 00:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Making a English Article that exists in another language

Hello~ I saw a Wikipedia page for a Korean band that exists in Korean. However when I tried to submit an English version of the article it was rejected as not being notable and not having sources. I would assume that if the band were not notable there wouldn't be a Korean page. Any advice on what to do? YooAnneMee (talk) 00:53, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Your assumption is mistaken. And your reading of the template is mistaken too: your draft was not rejected but declined, meaning that you're welcome to improve it and, when its problems seem to be fixed, to resubmit it. -- Hoary (talk) 01:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] Each language's Wikipedia is an independent project, which sets its own standards. The English-language Wikipedia is generally considered to set the most stringent standards for WP:Notability and Sources, so it's quite possible that the Korean Wikipedia accepts subjects as notable, and minimum levels of required sources, that this Wikipedia would not.

In this instance, in addition to the above-linked policies, WP:Notability (music) will be of interest to you. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 01:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

The band looks notable to me so I suggest you add a couple more sources with significant coverage and resubmit. C F A 💬 01:22, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

IRC

Are wikipedia policies are applicable to its IRC channels? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 11:27, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes and no. Common sense applies. But: IRC has no article namespace, or an equivalent (so policies related to it don't apply) for example. Could you be more specific? Luhanopi (talk) 13:30, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@Luhanopi: I forgot to mention. Like WP:CIVILITY. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:39, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Mostly should be followed (except for the sections related to edit summaries, obviously). In my opinion, that policy is common sense. How and whether it will be enforced is another thing, Luhanopi (talk) 15:32, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

As I said below, Wikipedia's policies do not apply in any way to IRC, except at the discretion of those running the IRC channels. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 15:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok. But that particular policy is mostly common sense. Whether or not the policy applies, the behavior against that policy would likely not end well. Luhanopi (talk) 15:56, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor, the only policies which apply to the IRC channels are those which the folks running the channels decide to institute. They're not run by the WMF and aren't required to follow any rules set up on WMF projects. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 13:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

But, common sense of course applies. Luhanopi (talk) 14:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Common sense applies if the owners decide to apply it; in the end, it's their server. Though Libera Chat, as the provider of the software, may also have some say in the matter - not sure how much, I'm a Discord regular rather than IRC. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 14:34, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

You probably won't succeed in getting a policy applied to someone else – there's not likely going to be any external pressure applied to them unless they become a constant problem to everyone. (Or unless they do something illegal.) You would certainly be wise to act as if Wikipedia policies apply, but it would be very difficult to make anyone else do the same if they didn't want to. TooManyFingers (talk) 16:23, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Don't people get blocked over screenshots of what they write? Logoshimpo (talk) 03:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Escape the Fate

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Escape_the_Fate&diff=prev&oldid=480381331

User:Panic Reaper tried to condense a section in Escape the Fate in 2012 and goofed up the citations. I think I've tracked down the problem, but then I ran out of steam. Can someone help (to really mix a metaphor) untangle this mess? Snowman304|talk 06:51, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion criteria

A quick question...

An article is created by a user who is later blocked from editing that article due to disruptive editing and COI. The article is subsequently deleted at AfD. Several weeks later the blocked editor recreates the article and places it directly into mainspace.

Is the article best nominated for speedy deletion under WP:G4 (recreation of a deleted article), WP:G5 (recreation by a banned/blocked user, or in violation of general sanctions), or under both criteria?

Any help gratefully appreciated. Axad12 (talk) 06:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Please consider dropping some links to the article, editor, etc. Will be easier to answer this with more details. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:16, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

This is the article [7].

The previous AfD is here [8]

I opted for G4, but in hindsight I suspect that G5 would have been more straightforward. Axad12 (talk) 07:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

They appear to be partially blocked from that page but are still able to edit it somehow. Weird. I've started Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Partially blocked user still able to edit page? to discuss the technical side of this. Let me investigate a bit more before deciding if I can CSD this... –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:35, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I decided to WP:G4 it. The content was pretty similar to the deleted version. I will also ping Star Mississippi and let them know about this block evasion. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks. Is it worth salting the article? The user has a clear COI and an apparent disregard for policies and guidelines. For example, the article was also nominated under G4, by another user, when it was still in draft stage, leading to the COI user recreating it in a different sandbox to avoid deletion (the G4 was actually turned down at that point due to it still being a draft). The whole saga just looks like a series of bad faith actions to me. Axad12 (talk) 07:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Good idea. Salted indefinitely, extended confirmed. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:58, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Creating a Wiki page

I wish to create a Wiki page about myself so that information is easily available to others. Can I do it? Can I prepare a draft and submit it to the Wiki team for verification? AgnihotriRK (talk) 03:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

AgnihotriRK, information about yourself will be easily available to others, and can be exactly as you wish, if you put it on your own website. Attempting to do so on Wikipedia will very likely fail; and whether it fails or passes, will probably waste a lot of your and others' time. If you're notable, others will want to create an article about you, with no prodding (let alone payment) from you. -- Hoary (talk) 04:45, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

To elaborate, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not social media. Attempts at autobiography almost always fail (see WP:AUTO). Unless people with no connection to you have published articles about you that can be valid references (see WP:42), you will fail, having just wasted the time of a Reviewer. If you truely believe you are Wilipedia-notable, see WP:YFA fpr the process. David notMD (talk) 08:41, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Changing the Source of A file

Hello, I have uploaded a file as my own work because I misunderstood the statement. I do not know how can I change this. I would appreciate some help with it. Istarek (talk) 11:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

You'll need to edit the description page on Wikimedia Commons to change the source and author to their correct values. You'll also probably need to change the licensing info, and note that the image can only stay on Commons if it has been released under a suitable free license. J11csd (talk) 12:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

It looks like you've updated the source (although bear in mind that it's often useful to mention where the file came from, not just who), but left the author as yourself. This parameter should reflect the original creator of the file (i.e. the person who took the photo), not the uploader. J11csd (talk) 09:55, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

reliable reference

Hello, would declassifieduk.org be considered a good source? Thank you. CircleJump (talk) 05:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I would assume so, given it has its own page at Declassified UK. Koopastar (talk) 05:56, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Having its own article is irrelevant. There are plenty of unreliable sources with their own Wikipedia articles. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@CircleJump Welcome! For the future, we have a specific place for questions like that, WP:RSN. It has an archive to search in, and there I found Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_437#Declassified_UK. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:36, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Add a certificate to a Wiki page

I wish to add a certificate (from a Public Prosecutor's Office) on a website that exonerates the gentleman concerned of any crimes. I don't know how to add the PDF certificate to the site. One has to jump through so many loops. Thank you Xander Fir (talk) 07:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Xander Fir.

First question: has this certificate been published? If not, then it may not be cited and no information from it may be used in the article (unless the information is also in a published source, of course, in which case why is the certificate relevant?)

Second point: if it is published, then it may be cited, but it will be a primary source, from which only uncontroversial factual information may be cited. So the article could then say something like "The Public Prosecutor's Office stated that ... ", but must not attempt to draw any conclusions from that statement - that would be original research, which is forbidden in a Wikipedia Article.

I suggest you have a look at WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS - Wikipedia is not the place for advocacy, no matter how worthy the cause may be. ColinFine (talk) 09:16, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Colin Fine, thanks for your reply. If one checks at the Public Prosecutors Office in Palermo, as per the doc I want to upload, which was published (issued) by them, you will find that there is nothing outstanding against Palazzolo. Wikipedia is happy to publish news from the media, which is so famously mistrusted by people, but they don't want to publish a primary source document fromn the court that charged him in the first place. Palazzolo is 77 now and exhausted by this battle to prove his innocence, fighting the likes of Wikipedia, from the start, and - given his exoneration and freedom thereof - wants to drop it. No one can arrest him or impune him any more. 197.87.7.130 (talk) 08:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I mean impugn 197.87.7.130 (talk) 08:19, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Vito Roberto Palazzolo website

I edited Palazzolo's wiki page, and my edit was removed. Added to which I want to upload the document from the Public Prosecutors Office at the Court of Palermo (Sicily) that exonerated him of all crimes. Can anyone help me do this, and why was my edit removed? Xander Fir (talk) 07:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The article's history shows that Frost has asked you to argue persuasively in Talk:Vito Roberto Palazzolo for your proposed changes. Please do so. This "document": Where is it published? -- Hoary (talk) 07:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I looked at the Talk site, listing our old arguments. I couldn't find anything referring to my latest edit, where I want to add the fact of Palazzolo's exoneration - of all criminal charges - by the Public Prosecutors office in Palermo. What I want to add is something new, and uncontestable. I don't need to argue "persuasively", but present the document. It's over now. Xander Fir (talk) 08:24, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Where have you found this document? And wherever it is, hasn't it been adequately summarized by reliable Italian news websites? -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I looked at what you added. Here's its second half: {{Expert needed}} I need an expert to help me upload the document from the Public Prosecutor's Office in Palermo, that exonerates Palazzolo of all criminal charges. Almost certainly no such upload would be appropriate, let alone necessary. If it were appropriate, then an article would be about the least appropriate place to ask for help in the enterprise. So Frost was entirely right to make the deletion. -- Hoary (talk) 08:01, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Why would an authentic document exonerating a man of his crimes (after 40 years) not be "appropriate", or "necessary"? And why if it was appropriate, as you suggest, would "an article...... be about the least appropriate place to ask for help in the enterprise." I don't understand what you mean. Xander Fir (talk) 08:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I didn't say the document would be inappropriate (though I suspect that it would be). I said that uploading it would be inappropriate. Xander Fir, if you can point me to one or two other articles here within which "I" describes his or her needs and appeals for help, please do so. But until you do, I'll maintain that an article is a highly inappropriate place for such an appeal. Post it on the article's talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for replying. Apologies, but I still don't understand what you mean. A document (not an article) was recently released (30/11/23) exonerating a man of his crimes. After 40 years that's BIG news. How can I add a very brief explanation of that on his Wikipedia page, and for autheticity's sake, upload the document? And then we can lay it to rest. Xander Fir (talk) 09:23, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

If it is "BIG news", then you should have no trouble providing news sources which have reported on it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Are there no independent reliable sources that report on this man being exonerated of a crime? It shouldn't be necessary to use a primary source. 331dot (talk) 09:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

The Head of Certification Service at the Public Prosecutor's Office in Palermo is a "reliable source". Could there be anything more authentic, original and reliable than this? Xander Fir (talk) 09:32, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

It may be reliable, but it is not independent. Are there no news reports of this man being exonerated of a crime? 331dot (talk) 09:33, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

'll get back to you ASAP with that. Thank you Xander Fir (talk) 10:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

How is the Public Prosecutor's Office not independent of Vito Roberto Palazzolo? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Indepedent or not, it's a primary source, not an indepedent commentary. ColinFine (talk) 15:48, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I wasn't questioning it being a primary source; but the claim that it is not independent. The page to which you link is quote clear: "Primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia [...] with care. A primary source may be used on Wikipedia [...] to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

A media article is independent, but historically often skewed. Since a primary source from the Court itself isn't acceptable, what is? An opinion from another person? 197.87.7.130 (talk) 07:34, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

No source is without bias. The sources are presented to readers so they can evaluate and judge factors like bias for themselves in determining what to believe for themselves. A source being biased does not preclude its use on Wikipedia unless it is alleged the source is so biased that it makes stuff up out of whole cloth. No matter how biased a source is- being exonerated is a straightforward claim that bias would not affect in and of itself.

A court is not an independent source for its own rulings. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

That does not mean that a court document could not be used as a source in the article under discussion. The court is independent of the article subject. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:09, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello Pigsonthewing

Thank you. I can't undertand why a man exonerated of his crimes can't - apparently - upload a document that clears him. In very simple language, can I upload the court document mentioned, or not? I can send it to you to review first? 197.155.23.71 (talk) 15:44, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

So you represent this man?

I don't understand why you can't provide a news report stating that this man was exonerated of a crime. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

He's a friend who's 77 and struggles with IT and tired of it all.

I said I would help, if I could.

He would like to clear it with Wikipedia, but doesn't have to as the litigation is now over.

He hits the roof - obviously - when I send him requests from Wikipedia, which has published so much for so long from media sources with an agenda (like newspaper sales), but now suddenly questions the evidence of documented clearance from the Public Prosecutors Office itself.

So - lets leave it; he no longer cares what you publish, and neither do I. 197.155.23.71 (talk) 16:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you saying the news is willfully refusing to report this? 331dot (talk) 16:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

After 40 years of media disingenuity he is 'willfully refusing' to speak to them anymore. 197.87.7.130 (talk) 10:31, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

You can't upload a document which is subject to copyright, without a 'Wikimedia compatible licence allowing it's reuse. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:59, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm trying to help you, I really am. We just need an appropriate independent source. Has he given an interview to a newspaper, which would then fact check his exoneration and report on it? 331dot (talk) 16:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I may sound irrascible, but appreciate your help. Palazzolo is old now and exhausted and done with trying to present his case. He certainly won't speak to the media, and can't understand why a bone fide court document is unacceptable to Wikipedia, as is. If I get the chance, I will ask him for further, independent evidence that it is real, but I won't hold my breath. Thank you 197.87.7.130 (talk) 10:26, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I Would Like to be "adopted" by an admin

hello I would like to be "adopted" by an admin. I have been on wikipedia for a long time 3-4 years usually I have been just using it but now i'm trying to actually USE it. So I would like an admin to teach me how to be one. And if you can teach me how to edit more skillfully then I would be very happy. (btw I know my account says like "made yesterday" but I lost my original account due to neglectfulness to passwords I swear i'm better now) Stuuf7 (talk) 00:51, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Stuuf7, take a look at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area. -- Hoary (talk) 01:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks a lot this will help. Stuuf7 (talk) 01:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Stuuf7 Why an admin? There are only a limited number of these and they have a lot of work to do! We have a specific mentoring system described at WP:GTF and your new account should have received a mentor, which you will see if you go to your userpage: there should be a "Homepage" tab there which has suggestions for what to edit and the name of your assigned mentor. If your account doesn't have this, then set one up at Special:Preferences by ticking the box at "Display newcomer homepage" and saving changes. The "Adopt-a-user" scheme is an older set-up which is less used these days, I think, Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:09, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I apologise, I was just saying that I would like to be adopted obviously I don't think It would be fro a admin it was just a thing Stuuf7 (talk) 12:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Content dispute

Hello, this is regarding content dispute on Pawan Kalyan and the relevant discussion is here: Talk:Pawan Kalyan#August 2024. The user @L5boat has performed cleanup on the article, which is very much appreciated, as the article needed a revamp. As part of the cleanup, the user introduced a few headers and phrases constituting the nature of promotion which is being added again and again in various forms and ways even after another editor and me have reverted them. Currently the discussion is ongoing and meanwhile the user contests that he had placed the status quo until then but that's false. That isn't the status quo content but the content placed by him and now before even the discussion ended, he removed the POV tag himself, before reaching the consensus. Here: [9] I neither agree to the changes he made nor endorse his edits. The content in dispute is here: [10] (you can see the content difference here).

1. Would be appropriate if someone can independently review the content difference as to determine if it is in the nature of the promotion or not. 2. Alternatively or preferably place back the POV Tagline until the dispute is resolved. 456legendtalk 22:45, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

@456legend: Please follow the process at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:56, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Editing a reference

on this page I am trying to update a dead link:

es:Ronnie Earl#Ronnie Earl and the Broadcasters

at the bottom of this section there are three links. The top one is dead and I want to replace it with an archive.org link.

http://www.bostonblues.com/stories.php?key=storyEarl should be

https://web.archive.org/web/20101212075158/http://bostonblues.com/features.php?key=storyEarl

When i enter edit mode and click in that area it only shows me the bottom link of the three. Completely confused.

This whole section doesn't even exist on the english version of the page. Dune17856 (talk) 00:34, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Using MediaWiki, you don't edit a reference where the reference appears, you edit it at the point from which it springs (or from one of these). If you have further questions about editing es.Wikipedia, better ask them there, not here. -- Hoary (talk) 00:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

TY, but them there sent me here to seek guidance from the community. But will try to decipher your response. Dune17856 (talk) 13:34, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

actually very helpful response. Problem solved. TY! Dune17856 (talk) 13:55, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Comma in page title

There is currently a page for an album titled "In case I make it," with improper title casing. WP:AT states that the quotation marks are fine but I can't find anything that talks about commas, so I'm unsure if I should move this page to either "In Case I Make It" or "In Case I Make It,". Koopastar (talk) 03:41, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

The quotes and comma seem reasonable here since it is the official album name. Amazon link. This might be a good question for the article talk page though. Talk:"In case I make it," Then folks that have the article watchlisted can weigh in. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:22, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Koopastar: Why do you think it has improper title casing? We omit capitalization of certain words but if the official title does not have a capital then I don't think we add it. Compare "In case I make it," and Everything Is A Lot at the official site. They deliberately omit capitals in the first, probably to make it look like a quoted text. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:03, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I was just going off of other album pages that capitalize a lowercase title such as The First Glass Beach Album, but if the quotations and selected capitalization make it exempt then I'd be fine leaving it as-is. Koopastar (talk) 16:17, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Dictatorship or Autocratic?

Namaste, I recently read an article about Sheikh Hasina, the former Prime Minister of Bangladesh. I noticed that the word "dictatorship" was used in her introduction. "Dictatorship" seems like a strong word for a democratically elected leader. While I agree that she has used power to manipulate election results by controlling the media and arresting opposition, I believe she is more authoritarian than a dictator. In my opinion, using words like "dictatorship" would be more appropriate for countries like Saudi Arabia, Yemen, or China, but not here. It feels biased and inaccurate to me.

As a newcomer, I am unable to edit the page, and I haven't received a response from another experienced editor on the talk page. I posted this here to see if someone can edit the page or tell me whether "dictatorship" or "authoritarian" is the correct word. Thanks राजकुमार^(talk) 07:31, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Being democratically elected doesn't preclude someone from being a dictator, Hitler was democratically elected. What matters, however, is the terminology that the majority of independent reliable sources use. You just posted on the talk page yesterday- you should give more time for people to respond. 331dot (talk) 07:35, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

It's a bit more complicated with Hitler...he managed to circumvent the checks and balances in the Weimar Constitution after he was appointed chancellor; see also Enabling Act of 1933. Lectonar (talk) 12:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

A softer example could be Lee Kuan Yew who despite being labelled as a dictator by some, was an elected politician for a long time. – robertsky (talk) 16:40, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Generic name error for IMDb Editors

I was just curious how I could fix this problem for my sources since IMDb doesn't give the full names of its editors. Thank you for your help Zombiezilla (talk) 08:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello. You shouldn't be using IMDB as a source at all, as it is user-editable. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks! Zombiezilla (talk) 08:17, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Zombiezilla: See also WP:IMDb. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I changed the sources so IMDb isn't used. Zombiezilla (talk) 16:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Bare pdf references

Hi to everyone, I am trying to fill up a couple of bare references with pdf but I did not understand how to do it. Could someone help me with these? Best wishes. Nihaon (talk) 15:03, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Nihaon: Please clarify what you mean by filling with pdf? RudolfRed (talk) 15:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you a lot. In this article Empathism - Wikipedia I have used Refill program to insert correct references. If you check it you will notice there are two references that are still marked as "bare references". In fact the Refill program is not working with these two... I do not know if you could tell me how to do it and if possible to fill up these two references.

Thanks a lot. Nihaon (talk) 15:58, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

ReFill doesn't work with PDF bare URLs. You'll have to fill out the citations manually. C F A 💬 16:57, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Nihaon. I'm not surprised that ReFill couldn't work on those, because the required information is not apparent.

Your citation 128 is to a commercial page advertising a publication. If you mean to cite that publication, then you must provide the author, title, publisher, date, page: they are not apparent on the site you linked to, so ReFill can do nothing.

108 appears to be a download of a PDF from a government department. Again, there is no way ReFill can determine the necessary bibliographic information (and indeed, I'm wondering whether it is really "published"). ColinFine (talk) 17:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

valdalism

Hi, someone has completely replaced the information on a Wiki page: Nailstone, with various foreign language edits. There appears to be no history left so I'm not sure what to do? Velvetfreak (talk) 17:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

https://ceb.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nailstone. Velvetfreak (talk) 17:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

That is a foreign langage Wikipedia. perhaps you are looking for Nailstone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.238.235.108 (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

That is the Cebuano Wikipedia which is unusual in that it contains millions of articles machine translated by Lsjbot. Cullen328 (talk) 18:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328 That's wack. Alexysun (talk) 18:29, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Alexysun, each language project is independent and sets its own policies and guidelines. The Cebuano Wikipedia is definitely an outlier when it comes to permitting machine translations. Cullen328 (talk) 18:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Faculty pages at university website to establish faculty status

In lieu of using a CV for citation, is it acceptable to cite official faculty pages at a university website to establish faculty status at the university? (In the particular case I'm working on, it's emeritus faculty status.)

Draft:Samuel Krimm

I've left the CV citations in there for now, but if I removed all items cited by the CV and just left the other items/sections, would that be substantive enough to resubmit? Philscijazz (talk) 19:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Philscijazz, and welcome to the Teahouse. Such sources are primary sources, and can be cited for limited uncontroversial factual information, but do not contribute to establishing that the subject meets the criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 21:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

If there isn't a general biography, can a page be submitted as a stub

Draft:Samuel Krimm

Krimm is already mentioned in two places in Wikipedia:

List of fellows of the American Physical Society (1921–1971)#1959

Willie Hobbs Moore

If CV sections are removed from this draft, is there enough there to make a stub? Philscijazz (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello again, Philscijazz. A stub requires the same level of sourcing - to establish that the subject is notable in Wikipedia terms.

(My personal view is that stubs are a historical feature from the early days of Wikipedia, which are unfortunately still around in significant numbers. Given that no draft article will be accepted without suitable sourcing, and editors are encouraged to develop drafts in Draft space, I don't see any reason why a single new stub should be added to the encyclopaedia). ColinFine (talk) 21:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, he is an academic who satisfies criteria 2 and 3 of academic notability:

Wikipedia:Notability (academics)

2. He won an APS prize in 1977, and a Humboldt prize in 1983

3. He was elected as a fellow to APS in 1959

He is already mentioned in two Wikipedia pages:

List of fellows of the American Physical Society (1921–1971)#1959

Willie Hobbs Moore

The idea would be that those mentions could link to a page rather than remain unlinked.

I mean, I suppose I could resubmit it and hope for the best, and if declined then have to wait for an obit (hopefully still a few years off).

If I do resubmit it, is there a way I can include pointers to these details to pay attention to in reviewing the submission? Philscijazz (talk) 21:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Creating a user page

I'm new here and trying to set up my user page and have so many questions. Is the user page the same as my home page? Is the User page meant to be conversational not informational? Cynthia Wells (talk) 18:39, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

User pages such as User:Cynthia Wells are meant to be informational. Every page on Wikipedia is also paired with a talk page, which is meant to be conversational. In this case, the conversational user talk page is User talk:Cynthia Wells. If you get a message at User talk:Cynthia Wells, the software will alert you with a ping (and if unread for long enough, an email), since this is a primary way to communicate directly with other users.

Special:Homepage is something different than the above two mentioned pages. That is a hidden page that only you can see, and gives new editors ideas of things to work on. Hope this helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!  Cynthia Wells (talk) 21:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Cynthia Wells You can learn a lot about what you can put on your user page by looking at other people's, they are informational though. Some people use theirs to redirect to their talk page, opting not to have a user page at all, some use them to explain a bit about themselves and some use it to show off their wikibling; a totally made up word for barnstars, service awards (basically just editing and time milestones]] or things that they're proud of, like Good Articles, Did You Know entries, stuff like that.

People can get quite creative with it too, @Chaotic Enby comes to mind.

There is a style guide as well if you want some more inspiration, which you can find here. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 18:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Cynthia Wells. The purpose of a user page is for a Wikipedia editor to inform other Wikipedia editors about their interests, accomplishments and plans as a Wikipedia editor. A small amount of personal information is OK, as long as it is not promotional. So, informational not conversational. User talk pages are for conversations about the encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 18:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Yep, I'm here! Ready to help if you have any questions. The user page is mostly informational (and you can indeed get very creative with it!), while your user talk page (User talk:Cynthia Wells or User talk:Chaotic Enby) is the more conversational and practical one. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Adding that, as Cullen328 said, a user page is mostly informational in the context of Wikipedia editing, although some personal information is okay. For instance, my user page has the languages I speak and pronouns I use, alongside a bunch of Wikipedia-related stuff (tools, WikiProjects, etc.). Other user pages might have more personal information to help know the person, or none at all – provided you're careful with your online info, and don't look like you're trying to webhost a full biography or pass off your user page as an encyclopedia article, it's fine! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you all who replied!  Cynthia Wells (talk) 21:52, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Cynthia Wells (talk) 21:51, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Cynthia Wells (talk) 21:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Australian or Papuan language Wikimedias

Are there any Wikimedia projects written in indigenous languages of Australia or Papua? (I know about the Tok Pisin Wikipedia but that doesn't count.) If not, are there are any that are in the incubator, proposed, or have been shut down? 73.170.137.168 (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP, I'm not sure about the answer to this question myself, but you'll be able to figure it out by looking at List of Wikipedias. -- asilvering (talk) 19:10, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

That page does not appear to include incubator projects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:26, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

See meta:Noongarpedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for showing me this link. Though the website seems to be mostly in English. Even though it talks about Noongar culture, I don't really understand the purpose of this. I will try to research the language more. 73.170.137.168 (talk) 17:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

The page I linked to is in English, but links to several pages and projects written in the Noongar language. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:29, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant that the Noongar Wikipedia in the incubator is mostly in English. 73.170.137.168 (talk) 19:36, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

It might be that they've ported over the important pages from English wikipedia and just haven't finished translating them into Noongar yet? I'm not sure what the typical workflow is for languages in the incubator stage. -- asilvering (talk) 22:17, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I guess each of these languages is too small for an effective Wikipedia. They're probably all smaller than the Cree Wikipedia, which is already in danger of being shut down. But somehow the Atikamekw Wikipedia seems fairly successful even though the language is tiny? 73.170.137.168 (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I suspect that for a language's Wikipedia to be a success, the level of dedication of each individual editor and reader can make a real difference. If my language has a billion speakers but absolutely none of them are interested in Wikipedia, you can see what would happen. TooManyFingers (talk) 23:00, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

copyright license question

So Oman's government has an Open Government license (OGL-om) which essentially mean all literary, artistic, and scientific works posted by the government or any entity where the government owns 40%>= can be used for any commercial or non commercial purpose. But I am not sure about the official pictures of the Head of State (past and present) as I read somewhere that their pictures are copyrighted but I cant find that reference again. Since the license says all media posted by the government is freeuse do I assume the pictures of the Head of State are under that umbrella? Thanks CircleJump (talk) 18:57, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I have attempted to contact the government entities responsible for the license but they havent been any help.. CircleJump (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

i would personally say that if they explicitly say that all pictures are up for use and are not copyrighted then your picture of the head of state would be free to use. Stuuf7 (talk) 23:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@CircleJump: according to the template, the licence does not apply in the case of Data protected by copyright and neighbouring rights owned by a third party.

If the photos are copyright by a third party, then the licence does not apply.

I suggest you ask at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright and provide more information on the specific photo(s) you are interested in. RudolfRed (talk) 01:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

on unnecessarily advanced searches

by the black goat with a thousand young, this upcoming question may be my most oddly specific one yet~

with or without whatever tools i might be able to find in the preferences, is there a practical-ish way to filter a search to find

• only redirects containing or starting with a certain word;
• good or featured articles containing or starting with a certain word;
• redirects to good or featured articles;
• any mix of the above

because going through every title containing the prefix "the" for a niche use i'll realistically only need for a non-shitposty purpose once might take a while cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 00:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

You can use this SQL query for bullet #1. Log in, click "Fork", change '^Test' to your desired search word (but keep the ^), then click "Submit Query" to get your results.

Bullets 2 and 3 are probably possible. You can ask at WP:QUERY for that one. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:29, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

hehehe i stoled it for my own query >:3 (evil)

it sure isn't in a rush to execute, but i guess "the" is a pretty common word

until then, thanks cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Well I got thoroughly nerd-sniped by this question, so here's a query I came up with. It takes a good minute or so to run, and I can't be certain it's perfectly logically correct, and it only does featured articles, but the results do at least seem reasonable. J11csd (talk) 01:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@J11csd. Nice job with your query. Feel free to watchlist WP:QUERY if you want more nerd snipes of this type :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

What can I add?

I specifically joined to make an edit to the page about a Latin Phrase, De gustibus non est disputandum, because I believe I have found the earliest usage of the phrase, which clarifies its intended meaning. No other authority provides any cited instance.

Needless to say, the context is in Latin, so some sort of English précis seemed essential. This was of course deleted as "original research"; as was my contention that it was the first known instance. I did also provide some emphasis on the contextual meaning of the phrase; but it hardly constituted a personal philosophical opinion that might disputed.

The onus to prove that there isn't an earlier instance -- when all other authorities have failed to provide any -- seems impossibly high.

I was also told that "secondary/tertiary sources are preferred to primary sources", which seems an odd way of ensuring accuracy and factual integrity.

Given that the article already contained summations and interpretations of the meaning of the phrase, without citation, it all seemed a bit much.

And if we want to add original research, do we just publish it on our own websites and then cite it here? It's a small enough nugget that no journal will publish it as an article.

Thanks Benwiggy1 (talk) 14:41, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Helloo, Benwiggy1, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that Wikipedia is absolutely not the place to do what you are trying to do.

A Wikipedia article should summarise what reliable published sources have said on a subject: that is all. Original research is not accepted, and nor is information from non-reliable sources.

So, in answer to your last question: publish it on your website by all means, but that cannot be cited in Wikipedia. Write a book/article/paper on it that gets published by a reputable publisher, and then Wikipedia can cite it.

Sorry. ColinFine (talk) 15:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Is the primary source "non-reliable"?

This page gives a summary of content in a foreign language.

Complaint tablet to Ea-nāṣir Benwiggy1 (talk) 09:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Benwiggy1, the maxim may be Latin, but it's conspicuous within English: as one writer famously glosses it: "there is no disputing against HOBBY-HORSES". So perhaps Notes and Queries would find space for your very short paper (or your squib, as I've seen such things called). -- Hoary (talk) 09:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Bots creation/integration

Hi, I'm fascinated about the WikiBots. I just want to know how these are built and, how these are being operated. Do I need programming languages to build these or simple wiki markups.?

One more thing, Could I able to integrate with my user profile for a certain task.? If yes, then how.? Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 11:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Perfectodefecto. Bots require programming and approval. See Wikipedia:Bots. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Got it. May I know, which programming language do they use primarily to create the bots.?

I do have a little experience in ChatBots creation, that's why I asked. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 12:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto: Python is the most common and has a framework to help. See Help:Creating a bot#Reuse codebase. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:04, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Got them. Last question...

Are there any sample codes available on GitHub currently.? asking for, to have a reference point.

If no, where should I search.?

Many Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 13:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Got them on GitHub... Thanks a lot. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 13:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Unable to Publish an article

Hi Team, My name is Gulshan Pandey. I am working on an article about an Indian politician named Tarun Chugh. Unfortunately, it has been deleted or moved to draft several times, and I am unsure what mistakes I am making. Previously, I created the page for "Sonawari Assembly constituency," which was published on the first attempt, but this time I am having difficulty getting the article published. I have included many prominent media links as references. Could you please suggest what I should do to ensure the article meets the necessary standards? Thank you for your assistance. Best regards, Gulshan Pandey Gulshan99 (talk) 06:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Gulshan99: I have already answered this at the AfC help desk. Please don't ask the same question in several places. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Much of the content is not referenced. Either reference or delete. And it looks like a CV, not an encyclopedia article. And the refs should not be URLs. David notMD (talk) 11:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

All of his political career has been appointments to party positions, i.e., not elected to government positions, so very unlikely that he rises to Wikipedia notability. David notMD (talk) 13:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not getting an edit tab

I'd like to make a small edit, but there's no edit tab in sight.

I'm signed in. What can I do? I'm willing to start another account if need be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlet Wordsoutloud (talk) 14:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Wordsoutloud You won't be able to, it's semi-protected. This is a protection level used on Wikipedia that prevents registered users with less than 10 edits and 4 days on Wikipedia from editing. It also prevents all IP users from editing the articles. You can see the protection level of an article at the very top on the right. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Wordsoutloud, if you click on View source at the top of the article, you'll get instructions on how to submit an edit request and a blue button to click when you're ready to do that. Or you can make useful edits in other places until you meet the requirements to edit that article. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 14:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I've put my proposed edit on the Talk page. I'm not even sure whether it's small edit. It's just a line, but it's more than correcting a typo.

I'm beginning to think the world can live without finding out about "Four Ghosts in Hamlet" by Fritz Leiber. Wordsoutloud (talk) 14:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

article got rejected-any help?

hi there! My article got rejected and I thought I've done all the necessary things; sources, citation etc. Any leads? Draft:Maura Biava. Ariaserg (talk) 14:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Ariaserg: "done all the necessary things" No you didn't; there are entire paragraphs with no citation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

hi, thanks for your message. Would you mind telling me which paragraph you're referring to? It's my first attempt to write a wikipedia article and still figuring things out. Ariaserg (talk) 16:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ariaserg. Which of your citations are to a source which is reliably published, wholly indepednet of Biava and her associates, and contain significant coverage of her individually? It looks to me as if the answer is "none" - certainly, most of them are from galleries which have exhibited her, and so are not independent.

Unless you can find several sources which meet those triple criteria, no article is possible. If you can, then you need to write a summary of what those sources say - nothing else. Once such an article is accepted, you may be able to add a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information from non-independent sources. What Biava wants to say, or what her associates say, is almost irrelevant. ColinFine (talk) 15:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

hi, thank for your reply! As it is my first attempt on wikipedia writing, things are still a bit confusing to me. I chose to write about this artist that I like and discovered during my art studies in the Netherlands, and looking through the wikpedia articles of other artists I saw a lot of referencing galleries and art institutes that they have exhibited. Those institutions or, for example the Stedelijk Museum or the Freeze magazine, are not considered reliable? What could be an independent source for an artist if you don't mind giving me an example? Thanks a lot! Ariaserg (talk) 16:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

A place where a journalist or writer has chosen to write a substantial article, or a portion of a book, about that artist; and though they may have interviewed the artist in their research, the piece is not based on the artist's (or their associates') words. Find a good article about an artist, and look at the sources.

My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. ColinFine (talk) 16:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Why can't Lily Hoshikawa page be edited?

Why can't I change Lily Hoshikawa's gender to cisgender male to match the Japanese official sources since a user named Bridget-chan said that "Lily Hoshikawa is a trans girl" is a headcanon and Headcanons should not belong in Wikipedia. But why can't I edit that Lily Hoshikawa page? Because it had to do with vandalism or something? 103.186.35.26 (talk) 05:03, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

You have asked this question before, and the answer is unlikely to change. Tollens (talk) 05:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Basing what you say on a reliable source that you specify, describe the change that you want. Write on the article's talk page. Be precise. If you're persuasive, another editor will implement your suggestion. 126.208.212.39 (talk) 05:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Ferret: It seems like you might find this one familiar. Tollens (talk) 05:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The Lily Hoshikawa was semi-protected due to persistent disruptive editing problems. If you go to the article, click on "View History" and then click on "View logs for this page", you should see which administrator protected the page, why they protected the page and how long they protected it for. FWIW, the page can currently be edited by WP:AUTOCONFIRMED accounts, but not WP:IP accounts. So, you can either (1) create an WP:ACCOUNT and edit the article after your account achieves autoconfirmed status, or (2) make an edit request at Talk:Lily Hoshikawa. Regardless of what you decide to do, you're going to need to make sure whatever change you make satisfies relevant policies and guidelines, which is this case means Wikipedia:Verifiablity. If the sources cited in the Japanese Wikipedia article satisfy Wikipedia:RELIABLESOURCE, then you can use them; you should, though, be a bit careful because lots of the sources cited in articles on other language Wikipedias aren't always very good or otherwise considered acceptable for English Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Marchjuly@Tollens This is an LTA. Blocked. -- ferret (talk) 13:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks – thought so but wasn't certain. Tollens (talk) 17:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

On the fence about creating a page

I want to make a page about the 2016 racing game called BallisticNG but I am not sure if it is notable enough. It can average about 10 concurrent players according to SteamCharts, and has a small but dedicated community and is still receiving support from the developers, but it appeals to such a niche audience that it might not be worth the Wikipedia server space to write a page about it. Another similar game called Redout has its own article while having an even smaller playerbase, which makes me think it would be okay to make a BallisticNG page. One problem I already encountered was sources, since the only websites with any information about it aside from YouTube, the BallisticNG game wiki, and the developer's website are niche/independent game journalism sites. ApteryxRainWing (talk) 14:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@ApteryxRainWing Wikipedia is not short of server space and has many articles on niche topics (see WP:WHAAOE). However, you have identified the issue: we only accept articles on notable topics, which means there must be published sources meeting all of these criteria. It sounds as if it may be WP:TOOSOON for this particular game. Read this essay for one approach to writing an article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:03, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. The game is receiving its final update soon with possible console releases so I'll wait until then and hope someone like PCgamer or the PlayStation Blog reports on it, then reevaluate if it needs an article based off player counts and online discussion ApteryxRainWing (talk) 15:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

You can't decide based on player counts or online discussions, only on how much published reporting it gets from reporters who don't have any reason to care about it. Example: if there's a terrible unpopular game that only three people ever played, but it gets described on CNN news and all the newspapers write about it, it gets on Wikipedia. But if there's a great game with millions of players and no big reporters ever write stories about it, Wikipedia won't touch it. TooManyFingers (talk) 18:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Creating an Article based off Freightliner Custom Chassis

I tried to create a page based off Freightliner Custom Chassis division of Freightliner, based in South Carolina, United States.https://www.freightlinerchassis.com/about/ Winnebaggo (talk) 20:43, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you have a question, Winnebaggo? -- Hoary (talk) 21:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Winnebaggo. In order to create an article about any subject, you must first show that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - roughly, that several people wholly unconnected with the subject have thought it worth spending the time to research and write about the subject, and been published in reliable places.

You have only two sources in Draft:Freightliner Custom Chassis (which is not usually enough to establish notability) and neither of them is independent of FCC. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

Your draft has been declined, rather than rejected, which means that the reviewer is giving you a chance to find more suitable sources. But all that you added after the first decline was a link to a source which is not only not independent, but does not mention FCC at all. The point of a citation is to verify a claim in the article about the subject of the article: there is almost never any point in citing a source which doesn't mention the subject.

I'm afraid that you have written the draft BACKWARDS, as many new editor do when they try to create an article. ColinFine (talk) 21:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Living Persons Biography

 Courtesy link: Steve Englebright

How does one add details of marriage, children, etc.. to a living persons biography? GeologyRocks1 (talk) 18:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

GeologyRocks, that requires a reference to a reliable, published source that verifies the content that you want to add. We do not normally give the names of non-notable minor children unless they have been widely publicized with the consent of the parents. Otherwise, the accepted practice is to simply state the number of the children. Cullen328 (talk) 19:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for replying. In my original, and then follow up question, I did source 2 sites - one article and one official website- that verify Steve's marital status and that he has 2 grown children, in addition to the fact that he is now a sitting County Legislator. I was just wondering how to update?. Names of the 'children' are not necessary but the sources are reliable. GeologyRocks1 (talk) 20:18, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

GeologyRocks, the article is not protected. You can go ahead and edit the article, citing your source. Referencing for beginners explains how. Cullen328 (talk) 22:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Refueling (US spelling)

Surely this question has cropped up before, probably many times over; why are we populating numerous articles with the American spelling of fueling instead of the proper English fuelling?

As a prime example; Aerial Refueling - even the page title is 'wrong' according to the spell-checker here at the Teahouse. A quick search of the article reveals 136 examples of the US spelling, together with 24 examples of the British English variety. It hurts my eyes!

BTW - I have looked through the Help pages, and I note that we have articles titled 'color', 'harbor' and 'tire', and many more, but so far I haven't found an essay explaining or justifying en.Wikipedia's position. Where is the guidance?

WendlingCrusader (talk) 15:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

All the guidance is on MOS:ENGVAR. In particular we should be consistent within articles so feel free to change the british spellings to american ones in that example (not inclusive of the proper nouns which should not be altered) -- D'n'B-t -- 15:52, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

WendlingCrusader, Wikipedia is a collaborative worldwide encyclopedia project in the English language and all varieties of English spelling are accepted here. UK spelling should be used in an article about the UK, and American spelling in an article about the United States, and so on with articles about Australian and Canadian and Irish topics. For articles about topics with no direct connection with a specific English speaking country, the English variation should be established and consistent within the article, and should not be changed to another variation just because of the personal preferences of an individual editor. That is considered disruptive editing. Cullen328 (talk) 16:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@WendlingCrusader: Wikipedia has no spellchecker. It is your browser that does the spellchecking in edit boxes, so it works to the settings configured on your browser/OS/device. This will be helpful when they match an article's spelling standard, but unhelpful when they don't. See Wikipedia:Spellchecking. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 22:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for MOS:ENGVAR - that did the trick. You will also be pleased to know that I have just corrected nine examples of the incorrect British-English spelling variety, and as you correctly flagged up, the remainder are either buried in citations (e.g. web addresses) or are proper nouns (mostly 'Flight Refuelling Ltd').

And many thanks to the other respondents too.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 23:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Clarification on Notability and Proper Citations for a Publicly Traded Company

Hi everyone! I’ve recently created a Wikipedia article for a publicly traded company where I’m employed. I’ve disclosed my connection on the article’s talk page and have done my best to write it in a neutral tone. I’ve also used citations from reputable sources like Yahoo Finance, SEC.gov, and Businesswire rather than anything directly from the company itself. However, I’m aware that being publicly traded doesn’t automatically grant notability on Wikipedia. I’m looking for advice on how to ensure the article meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria, especially for publicly traded companies. Are there specific types of sources or coverage I should focus on? Also, if an article lacks sufficient references initially, but the company is likely notable, what’s the best approach to avoid it being nominated for deletion? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated, especially since I’m still learning the ropes! Samlee1890 (talk) 21:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link User:Samlee1890/sandbox the draft is blatant advertising, telling us everything the company wants us to know about themselves. Wikipedia is only interested in what reliable, independent sources have reported. Theroadislong (talk) 21:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

That makes sense. Thank you for the clarification. Samlee1890 (talk) 02:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello. You wrote your disclosure as part of your draft; instead you should disclose on your user page.

I'm afraid that you have a common, fundamental misunderstanding as to what it is we do here. Wikipedia is not a place for businesses to tell about themselves, their offerings, and what they consider to be their own history. A Wikipedia article about a business muat summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the business, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. Your draft is sourced exclusively to primary sources. We don't want to know what the company says about itself, we want to know what others choose on their own to say about it. 331dot (talk) 21:09, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I haven't looked at the draft. But I do note I’ve also used citations from reputable sources like Yahoo Finance, SEC.gov, and Businesswire, above. The article Business Wire starts by telling us that it's an American company that disseminates full-text press releases from thousands of companies and organizations worldwide to news media, financial markets, disclosure systems, investors, information web sites, databases, bloggers, social networks and other audiences. This suggests that it simply regurgitates what the company feeds it. "Reputable" would have to be qualified. -- Hoary (talk) 22:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Samlee1890, I agree with the assessment of other editors here. In its current form, your draft is pretty much the opposite of an acceptable Wikipedia article about a company. A Wikipedia article should summarize what multiple reliable sources completely independent of the company say about the company, and those sources should devote significant coverage to that company. The applicable guideline is Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Cullen328 (talk) 23:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

The Yahoo Finance source is just a reprint of a company press release. It does not even pretend to be independent reporting. Cullen328 (talk) 23:34, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I also agree with the assessment others have made about the draft especially what Cullen is saying about the current form being the opposite of an acceptable article with the exception of one tiny little thing I beg to differ with him on and that is this idea that reprinting press releases makes a source no longer independent and what would be more correct is this makes the source a primary one and not secondary. To be a non-independent source would require some kind of legal or monetary connection between the subject and source, but simply reprinting press releases is not enough to prove this kind of connection between the subject and Yahoo Finance or between Yahoo Finance and any of the many subjects they may or may not choose to reprint press releases on. That doesn't make them any less reliable or prove they are in cahoots with any of the subjects they report on. It simply means they decided to do some lazy reporting. Fast and easy money. That's how the kids are doing it these days am I right? My take on it is that reliable sources like Yahoo Finance don't have to pretend to be independent because they are. I think what Cullen is getting at here though is the same basic end result that the article needs to have reliable secondary sourcing with "significant coverage" that goes beyond just a reprint of the press release. We are just arriving to the same destination in different vehicles I guess... lol Huggums^{537_voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk)} 23:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Actually, I took a closer look at the Yahoo Finance source and it seems fine to me, but you should find some better ones. I thought it was just a press release reprint, but only the first paragraph was reprinted. The rest of the article was significant analytical coverage. You have only one just barely secondary source for the article and the disclosure absolutely should not be "viewable to the public" or going live. Huggums^{537_voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk)} 23:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

In addition to what others have said, the NASDAQ source is just a list of their regulatory filings.

I've been looking but there's been very little significant coverage that would be sufficient create an encyclopedia entry. Perhaps the Bloomberg Law piece on a lawsuit against the company and an investor for an alleged buyback scheme, but certainly not enough by itself. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 23:52, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm understanding now that the article must be a culmination of what outside reputable sources state. Thank you. Samlee1890 (talk) 02:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Samlee1890,In addition to what other contributors has said. It's neccesary you summarise your article and write in neutral point of view, I imagine how difficult that would be seeing you work with them.

Also, I think it's neccesary you create a userpage (Your name is still appearing in red linking, you deserve the blue tick!). Tesleemah (talk) 01:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Tesleemah, creating a userpage is not a requirement for anyone - many long term editors prefer to keep that redlinked. In this case, since the OP has a COI, their userpage is the easiest place to put a COI declaration, but it's not required of them as long as they declare properly some other way. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 13:43, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Reliable sources

 Courtesy link: Draft:SABABA 5

I'm writing an article about a band. They have several known songs that are played often on known European radios, and there a few dozens of articles and reviews about their releases. My first draft was declined and I would like to know how to choose better the relevant articles to cite from. I doubt that this band doesn't have enough reliable coverage for an article on Wikipedia.

Can anyone help? Drabeit (talk) 17:55, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Drabeit, if you doubt that Sababa 5 doesn't have enough reliable coverage, I suppose that you think it does have enough usable coverage. Usable means all of (i) reliable, (ii) disinterested (independent of Sababa 5), and (iii) substantive. Choose the best three examples. (NB Each must be reliable and disinterested and substantive.) Here (in this thread), provide a link to each of these three. -- Hoary (talk) 21:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

It sounds like you're claiming the band meets WP:BAND criterion #11. If they do, you would need sources to prove that, such as published playlists from radio stations. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:14, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Struggles with first post

Hello Teahouse community,

I've attempted for several months to create a wiki page for a friend of mine who's a rising boxing star(Robin "Robz" Safar) and recently had his breakthrough fight in Saudi Arabia. However, I've made over 10 edits and have gotten rejected every time. I've used a neutral approach to it all to make sure it's not seen as promotional and I've also provided sources for everything. The most recent submission has now been pending for close to 5 months and I'm not quite sure as to why it's taking so long for something very minor, just for informational purpose to help the boxers future potential fans read about him; and also those who are curious. I'm a bit lost and would appreciate any assistance greatly!

Wish you all a blessed day.

Sincerely,

Malik & Team Robz Robin Safar (talk) 14:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Robin Safar. Note that if you are not Robin Safar, you should not be using his name as your username. You should also read WP:COI and make sure you comply with the requirements. 57.140.16.35 (talk) 14:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Malik. "to help the boxers future potential fans read about him" is called promotion, and is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 15:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

To add to the above, Wikipedia articles doesn't have articles on anyone who is up-and-coming. They must have already arrived. So, no rising stars, because it's WP:TOOSOON for Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

WMF ignoring or just not responding to my emails?????

Is there a reason behind this?????? I've been emailing them every day for the past week and they haven't been responding and they're not being any help at all! I don't know how else to get in contact with them if they're not responding to the emails I send them on a day to day basis! 149.86.34.94 (talk) 23:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

What are you trying to do? Maybe a daily email to some rando at WMF is not the correct approach? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Exclamation marks! Multiple question marks???? Messages every day: If it were me who viewed these messages (or anyway the first of them), I'd assign them a very low priority. -- Hoary (talk) 00:02, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

So, you're spamming them. Non-response is exactly what you should expect. If you're sending emails to any of the VRTS addresses, well, many people assume those addresses are handled by WMF but they are handled by volunteer editors like me. What problem are you having that cannot be handled on this page or the help desk page? ~Anachronist (talk) 00:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

i think your problem is they way your approaching them. Please keep all emails calm and collected state your URGENT problem and wait for a response. it's not that hard, but if you are spamming them they won't answer you or they will just totally ignore you completely so PLEASE follow sentience two. Stuuf7 (talk) 01:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Emotional Freedom Techniques article

Hello Wikipedia/Wikimedia: I am disturbed whenever Wikipedia asks me for money, AND at the same time continues its biased and skeptical stance on Emotional Freedom Techniques, or EFT. Even on a quick search of PubMed, there are randomized controlled clinical trials published on the efficacy of EFT on combat-related PTSD, which Wikipedia's article repeatedly ignores. Here is a citation for one such RCT:

• Randomized Controlled Trial. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2013 Feb;201(2):153-60. doi:10.1097/NMD.0b013e31827f6351. Dawson Church 1, Crystal Hawk, Audrey J Brooks, Olli Toukolehto, Maria Wren, Ingrid Dinter, Phyllis Stein Psychological trauma symptom improvement in veterans using emotional freedom techniques: a randomized controlled trial.

The trial concluded the following: "The EFT subjects had significantly reduced psychological distress (p < 0.0012) and PTSD symptom levels (p < 0.0001) after the test. In addition, 90% of the EFT group no longer met PTSD clinical criteria, compared with 4% in the SOC/WL group. After the wait period, the SOC/WL subjects received EFT. In a within-subjects longitudinal analysis, 60% no longer met the PTSD clinical criteria after three sessions. This increased to 86% after six sessions for the 49 subjects who ultimately received EFT and remained at 86% at 3 months and at 80% at 6 months. The results are consistent with that of other published reports showing EFT's efficacy in treating PTSD and comorbid symptoms and its long-term effects."

What is the source of this continued bias? Do you not realize there are readers who know this field, use EFT for their own benefit (for over 15 years in my case) and KNOW BETTER...and are annoyed at an apparent conflict of interest that may include not only extreme bias, but also a potential financial incentive from those who wish to discredit EFT by keeping legitimate research on this topic from being cited in a Wikipedia article? I seriously doubt that this is due to incompetence on Wikipedia's part. If not, then why this continued, obviously biased, stance?

Yet you're asking for a contribution from individuals who know just how enduringly flawed your EFT article is. This is truly disturbing; what explanation can you offer? I appreciate your attention and await your reply - thank you! 47.196.118.82 (talk) 21:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you implying that there's a connection between what Wikipedia says about Emotional Freedom Techniques and the money you might donate? Fortunately, Wikipedia is well enough funded that it will not be influenced by such inducements. Maproom (talk) 22:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

If "individuals who know just how enduringly flawed [the] EFT article is" have suggestions for it that are soundly based on reliable, disinterested sources, then they are free to make these suggestions at Talk:Emotional Freedom Techniques. If anyone doesn't want to be asked for money, they can create a user ID, log in under that user ID, stay logged in for up to one year, and not see requests for money. -- Hoary (talk) 22:12, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Plus, any money that you donate goes to the already exceedingly well funded Wikimedia Foundation. It does not go to volunteers here on the English Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 00:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

A journal article about a randomized controlled trial is considered a WP:MEDRS primary source and is therefore of limited usefulness, if at all. We need secondary sources (surveys of many different trials conducted by different researchers). ~Anachronist (talk) 00:10, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

To recap the above: The Foundation's requests for donations and what the volunteers do at Wikipedia have no connection. None. As for the article about Emotional Freedom Techniques, as pointed out by Anachronist, for health/medicine articles, Wikipedia does not accept individual clinical trials as evidence/references. The article's existing references are published reviews, and support the conclusion that EFT is not proven effective. The Talk page of the article additionally points out that 'predatory journals', meaning that in this context those will published submitted trial reports for payment without providing editorial expert review of the quality of those submissions. David notMD (talk) 03:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

The essay Wikipedia:Lunatic charlatans describes a somewhat similar controversy back in 2013, and includes a statement by Jimmy Wales. Cullen328 (talk) 04:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Vittorio Storaro

Vittorio Storaro#Awards and nominations the page List of awards and nominations received by Vittorio Storaro is named Vittorio Storaro filmography 98.248.161.240 (talk) 16:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to help but I'm not sure what you're asking. Can you rephrase your comment as a question? –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit: A editor removed the filmography part of it and replaced it with the awards and nominations. The awards and noms should be in its own article though. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 04:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae, @98.248.161.240. Fixed the pages. Should all be correct now. Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 04:41, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Are the references correct

Hi! I was wondering if someone could take a quick look over Draft:Actinote zikani and see if I got the references correct, I'm not sure if they're formatted properly. Thanks! :) Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 20:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

At first glance, the references look correct. There's also an "External links" which looks correct, but should follow the "References" section, not precede it. Then there's a "Bibliography references" section, which seems to be more references, but put in a separate section, and having page numbers but no other bibliographical details or links. Maproom (talk) 21:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Sir MemeGod Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies is a predatory journal which is deprecated as a source. You have plenty of other sources, so I would remove those citations. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Talk pages

How do I remove my own topic from a talk page? I accidentally added one without being logged in and I'm not comfortable with my IP address being displayed. Degenlate624 (talk) 10:31, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Degenlate624 Since you want your IP removed (that's reasonable), I think WP:SUPPRESS is the way to go. Check it and follow the "email the oversight team" link. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Userpage issues...

Hello. Could I please get someone to help me figure out why my username won't render properly on my userpage? It is supposed to display in the top left reading from left to right horizontally, and when I first load the page it actually does this right for several seconds, but then for some reason it changes to reading from top to bottom in a vertical format. I did recently re-install User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/previewAndDiff.js and also installed User:BrownHairedGirl/BareURLinline.js which is a new script that I haven't used before, but I've tried uninstalling both of those and the issue persists. Bypassed cache, purge page and everything. I'm stumped. Help! Huggums^{537_voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk)} 18:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Huggums537 Sounds somewhat similar to this (quite recent) Phabricator: T373617 bug. Does it seem to match your experience? When I tested your user page forcing old vector and narrowed my browser some (so seems connected to username length, number of top icons, and width of browser) I was able to see it switch from basically working to re-render your username in a narrower box so ended up vertical. Skynxnex (talk) 18:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Right. I had no issues loading it incognito mode so it kinda seems to match my experience, but the thing is that I haven't added any extra top icons that I didn't already have before or reduced any of my browser width so I don't understand why I should only just now be matching that experience when I wasn't having that experience before. If I can figure that part out, then I might solve my problem. Huggums^{537_voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk)} 18:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Skynxnex, maybe I'll try a different skin and see if that works. If I do that will my common.js and vector.js scripts continue to work with the new skin? I mean are there any good skins compatible with these scripts? Huggums^{537_voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk)} 18:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

It looks fine to me using my default of Timeless (and vector-2022 as well). My point above is that it appears it's a recent regression that was maybe deployed today (I haven't looked up when the Thursday deploy normally happens during the day) and so likely would be fixed for vetor-2010 at some point soon. Skynxnex (talk) 18:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Skynxnex, thanks. I tried vector-2022 and it did fix the problem, but a bunch of other stuff rendered in funny ways so that opened up a whole new can of worms for me. Plus, at least one of my vector.js scripts did not run so there is more work to do. I'll be happy the old vector will work correctly soon, but people using the default have prolly been thinking my page looks pretty silly for a long time now, and that after all the time I spent getting it to render just right on the skin I was using. Oh, well. That's what I get for not remembering that everything doesn't work right everywhere all the time like it should in the ideal world... Huggums^{537_voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk)} 19:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey, @Skynxnex I removed a bunch of extraneous top icons and whatnots from my sandbox because the issue started happening on all my userpages including talk not just my main userpage and what I discovered is that even with nothing there my username is very bunched up or crowded just running a couple scripts I use though it does render horizontal, not vertical so there you go. Huggums^{537_voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk)} 01:30, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Huggums537: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Huggums537?safemode=1 omits all user scripts and looks OK to me at my normal window size but it wraps the page name in a narrow window. You can try {{DISPLAYTITLE:<span class="nowrap">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</span>}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter, that actually helped out some. I tested it in my sandbox and it made the username render ok, but one of the scripts is still acting funny so I'm going to see if I can track it down to find out if there were any recent changes made to it that might be related to the problem somehow. Thanks very much. Huggums^{537_voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk)} 11:08, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok, so I removed that one script: User:Bradv/Scripts/Superlinks.js and the problem went away on all userpages, but there hasn't been any changes to the script since 2020. The only change I have noticed is that in the uppermost section of my userpages now contains an [edit] section where I don't recall one being there before when I was editing my pages so perhaps some new media software changes are clashing with that script? Huggums^{537_voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk)} 11:41, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Unclear about academic notability criteria

Hi, I just submitted a draft article about an academic today, and it was declined by Utopes. First, thank you for the rapid response! I was expecting to wait perhaps months.

Utopes described the reason for declination as being lack of significant coverage in independent sources. However, a couple days ago on the Help Desk, I had an indication from StarryGrandma that notability criteria are altered for academics. Wikipedia:Notability (academics)

Specifically, the subject, Samuel Krimm, has won an American Physical Society prize, and is listed in Wikipedia as being elected to APS in 1959: List of fellows of the American Physical Society (1921–1971)#1959

StarryGrandma wrote: "He is definitely notable enough for an article since he was elected a fellow of the American Physical Society in 1959. His name is already in Wikipedia on the list of fellows here. A reference for that award is the database at the APS website. That same database reports that he received the Polymer Physics Prize in 1977 for "his outstanding experimental studies and theoretical developments in infrared and Ra-man spectroscopy and X-ray scattering from natural and synthetic polymers". Material published on the University website, including his curriculum vitae is fine for facts about him. Biographical coverage in newspapers is not expected but can be very helpful." Wikipedia:Help desk#c-StarryGrandma-20240826052500-Philscijazz-20240826042000

So, I'm uncertain if anything can be done. It's definitely true that there has never been an independent biography of Krimm, but it seemed to me that StarryGrandma was saying this particular requirement was not as strong for academics, especially those who have won prestigious prizes (in Krimm's case, APS Polymer Physics prize in 1977, and Humboldt Prize in 1983, both are included in the draft article).

If StarryGrandma was wrong about this, then I'm stuck. If not, should I try resubmitting with some special flag as to academic status?

Also, I just edited the draft to add mention of his supervision of Willie Hobbs Moore for her PhD (she is listed in Wikipedia at Willie Hobbs Moore. Is that at all helpful?

Thanks for your guidance. Philscijazz (talk) 01:26, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I should note that Krimm satisfies criteria 2 and 3 of the academic notability requirements:

2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level. (APS 1977, Humboldt 1983)

3. The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association... (APS 1959) Philscijazz (talk) 01:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

He can certainly qualify for an article under Wikipedia's notability guidelines, but the article needs other criteria to be met in order to be 'promoted' from draft to article. In this case the references used to back up various claims, such as his professor emeritus and other education credentials, need to come from a published source other than Samuel Krimm's own works and CV. I will note that I can see why you're having trouble in this regard, it's tough finding sources on the Internet, and most of the contemporary Fellows of the American Physical Society have their biographies supported by obituaries... Reconrabbit 01:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

If there is some sort of official source at UMich (and prior institutions) that can establish his credentials, would that suffice?

For example, if Princeton has a listing of his MS/PhD? If NYU/Tandon has a listing from Brooklyn Poly for his BS?

There are definitely original sources for his APS and Humboldt prizes (I've linked them in the draft).

Would be great to get this included before he dies... Philscijazz (talk) 01:56, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Specifically, can I use his faculty listing pages at the university to verify that he is indeed an emeritus professor and research scientist there?

https://lsa.umich.edu/physics/people/emeritus/skrimm.html

https://lsa.umich.edu/biophysics/people/emeritus/skrimm.html

Can his educational summary on a university faculty page validate his undergrad and grad degrees?

https://macro.engin.umich.edu/profile/krimm-samuel/

If I can piece together the main items from the CV without referring to the CV, will that work, and are these considered reliable enough sources?

Is the following history link sufficient to verify that he was the first Director of the Program in Protein Structure and Design in 1985 (scroll to final paragraph)?

https://lsa.umich.edu/biophysics/about-us/biophysics-history.html

If these items were all sufficiently reliable, and I removed the remaining items/sections cited by the CV, would there be enough substance remaining to pass muster? Philscijazz (talk) 06:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh, and if the list of publications is not acceptable, would his ResearchGate listing be okay as a replacement, to demonstrate that he is a serious researcher and publisher of peer-reviewed work?

https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Samuel-Krimm-15083197 Philscijazz (talk) 06:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Also, just to confirm: this from StarryGrandma was incorrect?

"Material published on the University website, including his curriculum vitae is fine for facts about him." Philscijazz (talk) 02:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

This document was brought to my attention by a fellow editor and will be of use in improving the sourcing: https://apps.lib.umich.edu/faculty-memoir/apps.lib.umich.edu/faculty-memoir/faculty/samuel-krimm.html Reconrabbit 23:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's a great summary, but it was self-written by the subject, thus I assumed not an independent source. So I declined to use that as a primary source.

I mean, he is a straight-up honorable guy and I doubt there is anything in there that isn't true. But if a CV is not independent enough, then this memoir (including his self-bio, even if written in the third person) probably isn't, either.

In any case, I just resubmitted the draft, removing all the CV-only citations, and will be relying on the awards and APS fellowship to qualify as academically notable, and all other citations are independent primary sources. Hope it gets approved.

If, later on, anyone wants to add CV-related stuff, or stuff from the memoir, by all means have at it. But due to my declared COI (I'm his son), I won't be involved in that myself, except perhaps on an advisory/suggestive basis. I certainly understand that I won't be making subsequent edits directly. Philscijazz (talk) 00:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Any interesting statement that isn't traceable to a reliable third-party publication is likely to be quickly removed from the article. In any situation where an unscrupulous subject could potentially be stretching the truth, we need a reporter's opinion, not the subject's opinion. This means only the very most boring material from a memoir (i.e. bare statements of uncontroversial fact) is even potentially usable. TooManyFingers (talk) 05:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

One might even say that a Wikipedia biography is just a survey of the published literature on that person, with the exception that any literature not independent from the subject is excluded. TooManyFingers (talk) 05:43, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, the article is now live in the mainspace, so my personal involvement is basically over.

A few folks have indicated that primary-source standards are somewhat relaxed for academic figures, especially academics who satisfy the special academic notability criteria (like prestigious awards and exclusive professional societies, such as American Physical Society in this case - he has been wikilinked from the APS fellow page for quite some time, with a missing page until now).

In any case, I removed the CV-only references before resubmitting it. The memoir link above seems to have been used only for birthdate and birthplace info. Philscijazz (talk) 05:53, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Probably time to archive this thread? (I don't know how to do that, or even if I have authority to do it.) Sorry for the multiple queries in different help spaces, I was a newbie anxious to get answers for my questions, and not sure about response patterns. The page is in mainspace and this question seems moot at this point. Thanks for everyone's feedback. Philscijazz (talk) 06:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Threads are archived after a few days once comments stop being added. No action needed on your part, it's done by an automated process. Reconrabbit 13:32, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia article cites opinion piece from untrusted news source

In the critical reception section on the fourth paragraph of the Wikipedia page for the 2024 Twisters movie, the article cites FOX News which according to the reliable sources page should never be sourced for political news and also has some consensus as of 2023 to not be cited as a source at all on this website. I read the FOX article in question and it starts off as a simple movie review but it keeps going on about climate change and the left. My point is, it's classified as an opinion piece on the FOX website and it appears to use buzzwords and also injects politics into a review about an action movie. I also want to add that I am not one who often reads movie reviews, so I am unsure if mentioning politics is unusual for a review. The Wikipedia article wouldn't lose or gain anything by deleting the citation, changing the citation, or deleting the paragraph entirely in my opinion, since the paragraph is mostly a comment about the racial diversity of the cast and a survey of moviegoers on how they heard of the movie. No one else seems to notice the citation, and if they have, they don't seem to care, so I may just be creating a problem from nothing or letting my personal left-leaning bias influence my choices, so I would like someone else's take on this before I change anything about this paragraph.

If you want to read the FOX article to judge if it's a good source, here's the link

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/twisters-whips-up-lessons-disney-far-left-hollywood ApteryxRainWing (talk) 12:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You're more likely to get constructive discussion on this topic on the article's talk page, where I see you've opened up a new thread already. Reconrabbit 13:37, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

A Suggestion

Hi, I observed that there are many concerns we need to address, or else they will become extreme in the future.

Major concerns like Global Warming, Climate Change, and Water pollution are growing rapidly, but many people are unaware of these. Only well-educated people can understand these issues and take significant steps. Given that people who spend their time at Wikipedia are well-educated, I suggest that if there is a way to show these concerns as a pop-up message or on the homepage whenever someone visits the site. it will be helpful. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 09:13, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Perfectodefecto. While I personally agree with you that such things are serious concerns, I don't think your suggestion falls within Wikipedia's scope per WP:NOT. Wikipedia articles can include neutrally worded content about how such things are serious concerns and how efforts are being made by some to increase awareness of them, but such content can only reflect what's written in WP:SECONDARY reliable sources; Wikipedia itself isn't set up to be used to directly increase awareness of such things in the way you suggest per WP:ADVOCACY. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

alright. Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 09:36, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Perfectodefecto I suggest that you read WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Cullen328 (talk) 17:48, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 18:34, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Removing Precise Coordinates from Article about Private Property/Sensitive Ecological Site

I'm a representative of the organization that owns the property mentioned in this article Singer Lake Bog. We don't mind that an article has been written about one of our properties but we would prefer that the exact coordinates not be listed in the article. Because we manage a sensitive ecological sites that are not open to the public, such as this one, we try to keep exact locations low profile to not attract unwanted attention to them. What is the correct process for me to request the exact coordinates be removed from the article? I made an edit myself which was reversed as "vandalism" and the person who reversed it kindly directed me here. Thank you in advance! 2603:6010:DA01:E6:DD2E:C291:2C66:F3E (talk) 10:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Your edit [11] was obviously not WP:VANDALISM and @Panian513 shouldn't have called it that. I'm not at all sure what the WP-right thing to do is here, though you seem reasonable to me. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

You will also need to follow up Google Maps (which identifies 'Singer Lake, Ohio') and OpenStreetMap (which specifically marks 'Singer Lake Bog'). A web search brings up numerous other sites that either describe or plot the location. I appreciate the need to keep the location of sensitive ecosystems and rare species secret from those foolish enough to damage them, but it looks as if this particular cat is well out of the bag. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 11:41, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

IP editor. As Verbarson says, the removal of the coordinates may not help much but what would, surely, help would be if you could substantially expand that article with more coverage from reliable sources, including the fact that it isn't open to the public, which currently is not mentioned. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I think the "Singer Lake" label on Google Maps is a relatively new addition since I had them delist it as a park last year. I've been on somewhat of a crusade to obfuscate our preserves since I started, though I hadn't considered OpenStreetMap that's very helpful. And you are probably correct that the cat is out of the bag on this one, it is one of our higher profile sites but I guess I just look at it as trying to tie up loose ends where I can. Plus I got to learn from you wonderful people about interacting with Wikipedia! 2603:6010:DA01:E6:DD2E:C291:2C66:F3E (talk) 18:48, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Mike Turnbull's suggestion, but I must point out that if you were to get involved with editing that article you would be within Wikipedia's definition of editing with a conflict of interest, and probably a paid editor.

That doesn't mean that you can't contribute to it, but you should make a public declaration of your status, and should submit edit requests rather than editing the article directly. (Please read the pages I've linked if you want to understand more about these).

Alternatively, if you have a published source| that says that Singer Lake Bog is not open to the public, I would be happy to add that to the article, citing the source. Unfortunately, while https://www.cmnh.org/discover/nature/natural-areas-program/museum-natural-areas certainly implies that, it does not say so explicitly. (The paragraph about sites which are open to the public does not make it clear whether those it lists are the only sites which are open or a selection from them). ColinFine (talk) 12:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

In addition to the suggestions made above, Wikipedia needs one or more photos of the reserve. Please follow the guidance at WP:A picture of you (which is about people, but the principles are the same). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:24, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Then again, that might just drive more people to seek to visit the place :P Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:55, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I did wonder if this discussion would evoke the Streisand effect. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:37, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Not that many people are looking at it, we're probably fine. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Very helpful thank you so much! I'll discuss with my colleagues about how we want to approach this, since I do think the article existing is worthwhile since it is a particularly noteworthy site, and some of what is there right now definitely made us scratch our heads. We'd also like to get an article together at some point for Mentor Marsh, since that is open to the public and another significant and noteworthy project of ours. 2603:6010:DA01:E6:DD2E:C291:2C66:F3E (talk) 18:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

While you are discussing this with colleagues, please bear in mind that Wikipedia does not allow role accounts (for example SingerLakePR): each person intending to contribute should create their own account after reading WP:PAID and WP:COI. We want to encourage your contributions but ask that you are aware of Wikipedia's norms. WP:ASFAQ has more information. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:55, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

hello

I just wanted to say hello OkIunderstandthat (talk) 19:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello. This page is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. Do you have one? ~Anachronist (talk) 20:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

A question about why people keep saying ill get blocked

Hello, i have a question about editing. If i edit a article, and change a line in a sentence to make the tone more energetic and detailed , is it not allowed? and also, why? Isnt all articles, just a bunch of peoples opinion becuase if somoen disagrees with a part of the article they can fix it? FroZt Writer (talk) 10:56, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@FroZt Writer Your Talk Page has considerable detail about the specific problem, which is that you are adding your own interpretations to make the tone more energetic and detailed. On Wikipedia, that's called original research and is forbidden. If an external published and reliable source says something is "mysterious" then a Wikipedia article on that topic can say it is, citing that source. Without the source, by policy we stick to a neutral point of view. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@FroZt Writer See WP:TONE for some guidance. The aim for any WP-article is for it to be a summary of WP:RS on the subject. Reasonable people can disagree on how this should be done in specific situations, and if that happens, they can WP:COMMUNICATE. Hope this helps some. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! FroZt Writer (talk) 11:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

You started editing today, and so far, every one of your edits has been reverted, and on your Talk page you have repeatedly been warned. For this reason, your activity is seen as not here to improve the encyclopedia. and you are at risk for being indefinitely blocked. What you have been adding is your opinions on the topics. For example, at the beginning of a Lead you added "Known all around the world for its bouncing rhythm catchy tune and mysterious tone." David notMD (talk) 12:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

Wikipedia is not just some opinion or blog you write whatever you like. Also excessive words and weavil words are not allowed. You are expected to stay neutral. You can check out the editing guide for way forward Tesleemah (talk) 13:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry not to assume good faith, but please look at the edit history, and you'll see clearly DO NOT FEED THE TROLL! 10mmsocket (talk) 13:14, 30 August 2024 (UTC) Read WP:NOTHERE alongside the edit history. 10mmsocket (talk) 13:16, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Blocked for disruptive editing. 10mmsocket (talk) 13:46, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@FroZt Writer From first edit to being indefinitely blocked in under three hours is fast, but not a record. You can appeal to request being unblocked, but this will require admission that everything you did - adding descriptions that were your own opinions - was wrong, and you will not do it again. Please do not bother unless you think you can change to adding referenced facts to articles rather than opinions. David notMD (talk) 16:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't know if it's a record, but I recall many years ago I blocked a legal-threat-making attorney representing Ziauddin Butt within minutes of creating a new account to evade the prior block. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:48, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

After checking, my recollection wasn't quite correct. It was 64 minutes. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

IP exempt explaination

Hi Wikipedians, I hope you are all doing good. I just wanted to ask that it shows I have an IP exempt till November 29th, so does that mean I won't be able to continue after that. Thanks for your time. Prober90 (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Certainly you can continue if you are editing from a non-blocked IP address. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

The problem is my IP is a shared one and is blocked. I had to request my account. Prober90 (talk) 21:00, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Prober90 You are currently IP block exempt and WP:EXEMPT suggests you can ask for an extension and describes how to do so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:33, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

ok thanks. Prober90 (talk) 21:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Frustrated and need help :(

For the record, I don't wish to get them blocked or punished. But I have difficulty in getting through to at least two editors in which I cant even tell if they are gaslighting me or genuinely misunderstand a common term, and do not wish to go through a protracted edit war over something so absurd.

When the media says that China and the USA both "topped the gold medal chart,"[12] it obviously mean that both countries won the same number of gold medals, placing them at the top of the ranking based on gold medals won. In this context, "topped" refers specifically to being equal in the number of gold medals, without considering other factors like silver or bronze medals.[13]

Yet one editor refuses to accept that Gold medal chart only counts golds. They claim that it also counts silvers and bronze and hence argue that China must come second on gold medal count/chart. I tried to explain it to them but fail.[14] I tried to reach out to noticeboards in the past but nobody responds and I am always basically handling them myself mostly alone on talk page. I know I can just cite Wikipedia policies and state that the info is sourced but expect they will just revert it.

I am noobish with how to resolve disputes best on Wikipedia. I get there's a process but there should be an easier way to resolve this, in which I am clearly not aware of. Evibeforpoli (talk) 03:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

If the media say, or if just one medium says, that X and Y both topped Z, this doesn't obviously mean to me that they topped it with a tie. Perhaps their positions were 1st and 2nd, or perhaps they were 2nd and 1st. Perhaps the thrust of what you're saying is correct, but it's hardly helped by use of "obviously". -- Hoary (talk) 04:52, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary I don't really understand much of your comment but are you suggesting that China and USA did not tie on gold medal count? A lot of media is saying that because it's undeniable. And perhaps the use of the specific word, "obviously" is inappropriate but I don't mean anything personal about it. I understand Wikipedia to be a platform for neutral, verifiable information. And that info is just supported by numerous reliable sources and is verifiable. Regardless I will try the dispute resolution process and thank you for the feedback. Evibeforpoli (talk) 21:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Evibeforpoli, you said that "When the media [say] that [P], it obviously [means] [Q]." I merely said that, for me at least, although P may mean Q it doesn't obviously mean Q; rather, Q is one possible interpretation. Though actually you were asserting something not about abstractions but instead about a claim made for medals won by two nations during the most recent Olympic games; and a writer or speaker's understanding of the facts shown in 2024 Summer Olympics medal table would indeed constrain the possibilities. But this is all rather beside the way. Just follow Pigs' excellent advice (immediately below). -- Hoary (talk) 22:39, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Evibeforpoli: Please follow the process at WP:DR. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing I don’t wish to escalate it yet on the talk thread, I get heated accusations that I am deliberately ignoring info despite the irony. And it’s just difficult to continue such a discussion on talk when instead of just focusing on evidence and policies, I cop a lot of such flak. I came here looking for some knowledgable neutral third party to mediate because if I continue to discuss with them on talk, it’s difficult to be professional about it. And I was hoping that you recommend me to a neutral third party that is willing to intervene but perhaps that could be found in Dispute resolution noticeboard?? But I don't believe I have ever tried them so will give it a go. Thanks for the tip.Evibeforpoli (talk) 20:58, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

That's my "signature" (or "sig"); it's appended to all of my talk page posts, as yours is to your posts. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Evibeforpoli, some options you have include WP:3O (third opinion) and the WP:DRN (dispute resolution). If neither of those are suitable for your situation, there's more suggestions on those pages. Do your best to stay calm and focus on the content - I know this can be hard, especially if you feel like the other editors are attacking you and not interested in discussing the content civilly, but try to be the example for others to follow. StartGrammarTime (talk) 03:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

want to search revisions

hi i wanna search all the revisions for an article for some work is there any way to do this? :) 2600:1700:8410:1560:C9FD:BC4D:1F54:67ED (talk) 21:04, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:WikiBlame? Solomon Ucko (talk) 21:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

At the top of an article there is a tab titled “View history.” Click on that and you’ll see lines of data starting with (cur | prev) followed by the date of a revision, editor name, size of edit, and there may be an edit summary. Click on “prev” and you’ll be taken to what the articles looked before that revision. (“cur” is what the article looks like now.) You can go down through all the edits, checking to see what the article previously looked like. I hope this helps you. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:43, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Notability question

Hello. I have done research on a former state senator from Oregon whose career involved a pretty big local scandal that ended his career. I find his story interesting and would love to make an article about the politician, but I want to check here if it's notable enough. I have quite a few newspaper sources that detail his early life, his career, the scandal, its aftermath, and his life after the scandal. However, there's very little beyond newspapers and it might be a topic that's only of interest to Oregonians. I'd appreciate any feedback if what I've described would meet notability guidelines. Thanks! FountofInterestingInfo (talk) 02:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:NPOL, state legislators are automatically presumed to be notable. Even without NPOL, the sources you found would probably pass WP:GNG, assuming there was coverage in multiple newspapers. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Thank you! FountofInterestingInfo (talk) 05:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

With multiple newspaper sources, it sounds like a very promising subject for an interesting article. Perhaps unnecessarily, I'll just caution that you need to summarise the material in the sources without adding any of your own inferences to tie it together, as that would be WP:Synthesis. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 04:14, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Got it. Thank you! FountofInterestingInfo (talk) 05:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

How do you edit the "On this day" section on the homepage?

How do you edit the "On this day" section on the homepage? Alexysun (talk) 18:29, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Only admins can edit the main page. Nevertheless, the info on the main page is usually crowdsourced on subpages by non admins, then put into queues by admins. The on this day subpage is at WP:OTD, I think. –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:41, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae Thanks. Alexysun (talk) 23:20, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae Honestly I think that WP:OTD should be linked on the homepage. Just so editors know they can contribute to On this day. Right now there’s no sign on the homepage that anyone can contribute to it. Alexysun (talk) 07:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Request for Review Article

Hello is there any admin who can review this article Muhammad Ali Swati ? He is an famous award winning Pakistani rescuer. the articles included the strong rereferences from BBC, Telegraph, Independent, Arab News. Janabanigu (talk) 09:10, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Janabanigu, the article isn't under review. It's up for a deletion discussion. Unfortunately I don't think you'll be able to save it - we don't tend to keep articles on people who are notable for only one event. See WP:BLP1E. -- asilvering (talk) 09:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering thanks but he is a notable not only from one event but also more different things which are already mentioned in the article history, Janabanigu (talk) 09:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

It has been marked as reviewed, but it is now nominated for deletion. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

@331dot yes i see . but, we can expand to add more references regarding the entity. The entity meets the GNG. Janabanigu (talk) 09:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Who is "we"? 331dot (talk) 09:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

talk about the wiki editors Janabanigu (talk) 09:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

References have been added after the start of the AfD, but the article is still about a person who was featured in the news for one event - rescuing people in a stuck cable car. His role in the rescue could be better described at an existing article about the event 2023 Battagram cable car incident. David notMD (talk) 10:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

He is already mentioned in that article's last paragraph; this could be expanded, Janabanigu, provided that it does not become disproportionate in relation to the mentions of others involved in the rescue, which could also be enlarged on. We must not unduly promote one rescuer (with a related commercial interest) over and above the others. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.209.45 (talk) 15:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello! If you’re looking to have an article about Muhammad Ali Swati, a renowned Pakistani rescuer, reviewed, it's best to reach out to an admin or editor directly on the platform where the article is published. Including strong references from reputable sources like BBC, Telegraph, Independent, and Arab News adds credibility to your article, which should help in the review process. Make sure to highlight these sources when requesting the review. Rizwan867 (talk) 11:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

No, that's not best. Please don't reach out to editors directly about AfC drafts unless they've made it clear they're happy to receive such requests. -- asilvering (talk) 11:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering Peace be upon you. I wanted you to help me publish my new article called the Almohad seizure of Madrid in 1196, which is ready. All it takes is someone to tell me it. Thank you. 🙏🏻 Abu yusuf Iacoub (talk) 09:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

To ensure your article about Muhammad Ali Swati gets reviewed, I recommend reaching out directly to the platform's admin or editor, emphasizing the credible sources like BBC, Telegraph, and others. Highlighting these references should aid the review process. At sell my house fast leavenworth, we know the value of strong, credible backing—whether in real estate or writing. Rizwan867 (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Rizwan867: Please do not advertise or use what looks like LLM-assisted language on here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:11, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Evaluation for the Account

Hi, Can someone please evaluate this wiki article Muhammad Ali Swati , might be this meets GNG. The person is a award winning social worker. He rescued more than 600 people during Naran Flood in August 2024 and also crucial role in the dramatic rescue operation of a group of children trapped in a cable car in the Battagram district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, in August 2023. IN 2023 Prime Minister give him a award and also in 2024 he receives the High Achiever of Pakistan Award from the Current PM Shehbaz Sharif. he already setup South Asia Longest and World Highest Zipline in Naran. Janabanigu (talk) 18:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Your question has been answered above. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:03, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Shantavira the question is different, Janabanigu (talk) 19:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Janabanigu This will be determined at the current AfD discussion. You should contribute at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Ali Swati if you wish to influence this, making the points you have made here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

OP blocked: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Thekhyberboypk --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:15, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

IP Block

Courtesy links: 129.205.113.196 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. My IP address is 129.205.113.196

Alternatively, I opted to use another IP address/network provider for my edits but it’s a borrowed one and the connection is quite poor. I’d be very grateful if my original IP address is unblocked and/or get an exemption to enable my effective contribution. Thank you.

King ChristLike (talk) 03:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

King ChristLike As you are able to edit{since you edited this page), it's unlikely you will be given an exemption, but you may contact a checkuser(see WP:IPECPROXY) if you think you can make a case. Typically exemptions are only given to those who have no other means of accessing Wikipedia to edit(such as avoiding government censorship). 331dot (talk) 10:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Personal information

How can I write my biography as an historical information for my dearest friend and family. 39.47.26.174 (talk) 14:29, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

IP user, please see our guidance on autobiographies. It's generally heavily discouraged as it can be quite difficult to write neutrally when writing about ourselves. It's also quite difficult to avoid working backwards, as we already know everyhting about ourselves.

Generally speaking, if you're notable enough to warrant an article, someone will make one in good time. You can also request that an article be created here.

If you still want to go ahead with this, please see WP:YFA, WP:42 and specifically the autobiography guideline section here. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:36, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse. Writing an autobiography for your friends and family is a fine and laudable aim - but Wikipedia is almost certainly not the place for it. What you probably want to write is about your experiences, your feelings, your thoughts: almost none of that belongs in Wikipedia.

If there is ever a Wikipedia article about you, it will not be based on your reminiscences, but almost 100% on what people who don't know you have published about you - even if you disagree with some of what they say. If there is not much independent material about you, then that means that, like most of us, you do not meet Wikipedia's criterai of notability, and there cannot be an article about you. ColinFine (talk) 15:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

The best way to do that project is probably to use paper, and to make a full history of the whole family, not just you. Then make a pretty large number of copies that you can give to anyone who wants it. People who want the family history are going to want to look at it again in 30 years; digital storage always fails, and viewing software often quits working. Paper doesn't fail except by obvious damage, and if you spread many paper copies around to different places, then even if two copies are ruined in a fire or a flood, the others are still OK and can be copied again. TooManyFingers (talk) 16:27, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

The policy WP:NOTMEMORIAL applies here. Short answer, no, you shouldn't attempt to write an article. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:24, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Per TMF and other editors' comments, what you have in mind is a memoir rather than an encyclopedia article. A plus for a memoir is that you do not need to include independent references to confirm facts (a Wikipedia requirement). — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 17:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

You can use one of the services listed at Wikipedia:Alternative outlets#Non-Wikimedia Foundation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:26, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Adding a translation by another author

Hi, I want to add an English article to an already existing German entry "Markus Redl" in de.wikipedia.org/wiki/. The text was translated into English by another author, how can I proceed? Thanks! Marie Gruber cetc (talk) 19:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Marie Gruber cetc, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see Translation.

Note that to be accepted, the translation must have adequate citations to show that the subject meets English Wikipedia's criteria for notability. It doesn't look to me as if any of the sources cited in de:Markus Redl are independent of Redl, and therefore none of them will contribute to establishing notability. You will need to find several sources which meet the criteria in WP:42 (they do not have to be in English, or available online), and base the article on what those sources say, not on what you know or, necessarily, on what the de-wiki article says. ColinFine (talk) 21:22, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine, thanks for your help and advice! Marie Gruber cetc (talk) 11:49, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

One other thing, Marie Gruber cetc: German Wikipedia, (and all Wikipedias) have different sets of rules, what we call here at en-wiki, "policies and guidelines" (German: de:Wikipedia:Richtlinien), but note that these are *not* translations of each other, and the rules can be quite different. Some practices that are allowed, or common at de-wiki, are uncommon, or even forbidden, at en-wiki.

One practice I have seen at de-wiki quite often is what is referred to here as "general references" in the appendix (without page numbers) in an article with no inline citations (superscript footnote indicators in the body) at all. It is not unusual to have a long article at de-wiki, considered to be of high quality there, which have no footnotes at all, or only very few, and just a pile of references in the Appendix, with no indication what they refer to, in the body of the article. This sometimes gets translators frustrated, because they start off with an article at de-wiki that is considered high quality, and then after the effort of creating a faithful translation into English, their article is rejected here as not satisfying our P&G.

So, do not fall into this trap. Please make sure you understand the requirements of en-wiki before you start, and if the article you are translating has few or no footnotes, and only general references, then understand that your job here will be more than just translation: it will be a research effort to find good sources (in any language) and write the article based on that, along with in-line citations sprinkled throughout the article. Any material in your translation that cannot be verified by a reliable source will be stripped out of the article mercilessly by other editors. You might have a look at Help:Your first article, which, while not aimed at translation, nevertheless succinctly lists the main principles of creating a new article at en-wiki, and that is what you are proposing to do, whether it is a brand new article from scratch, or a translation. Best of luck, and feel free to contact me at my Talk page after this discussion is archived, if you need more help. mfG, Mathglot (talk) 05:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Mathglot, thank you for the detailed explanations and instructions, I now have a much clearer picture of how to proceed. Many thanks for your kind offer to contact you again! Marie Gruber cetc (talk) 11:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Someone left a message on my talk !

Someone left a message on my talk ! how can i delete it or remove it? LittleNapRecliner (talk) 12:13, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Exactly the same way you made your edits to articles. Just edit your talk page. Meters (talk) 12:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@LittleNapRecliner Welcome to the Teahouse. There is general guidance at WP:UOWN and WP:BLANKING, the section just below that one. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

about wikipidia

how to use wikipidia Jayadevanb (talk) 13:50, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

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

I'm not sure just what kind of help you want, but you might find Help:Introduction useful.

Pease come back if you have any more specific questions. ColinFine (talk) 14:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Urban Community School

I wrote my first article and posted it as an article for creation. The article was reviewed by the editor Robert McClenon who posted "This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources." Robert also suggested I post the article here and ask for help, which I'm doing. The article is Draft:Urban Community School.

He also asked if I had any sort of financial or other interest in the subject. I have neither. I did go to a different school in the neighborhood where UCS is located and do admire what they do for kids who live there - but that's it. Nothing financial, no conflict of interest that I'm aware of.

I could use some specifics to help me rewrite the article the way Robert wants. The information he posted his very general. So if some other editors could provide some specifics, it would be a great help. I intend to ask Robert the same question.

Urban Community School is well recognized both locally and nationally for the role it plays in helping children in a neighborhood many of whose residents are below the poverty level. I think it's notable and worthy of a Wikipedia article, that's why I wrote one.

Any help you can give me is most appreciated. Benetsee (talk) 17:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Benetsee. The ideal tone for our encyclopedia articles is factual, not excited or persuasive. This article isn't the worst example of promotional tone problems I've seen, but it is still leaking through in a couple spots. For example the words "unique" and "boasts".

I agree with Robert that it seems like whoever wrote this has a conflict of interest. There are insider explanations for lots of things that even include the reasoning behind the decision, rather than just stating factually what happened from an independent third party point of view. For example, Ursuline Sisters of Cleveland founded Urban Community School which they wanted to be diverse, fit and mirror the neighborhood, be affordable for all, and provide students individual learning opportunity. Removing these insider explanations of why things were done would help make the article sound less promotional.

There's also some WP:EDITORIALIZING. That is, in some spots instead of stating facts, the author is inserting their opinion. For example, demonstrates that, with support, children from poverty-stricken homes can thrive, with 90 percent going on to graduate from high school.

Hopefully this is enough to get you started. Hope this helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:20, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips and the insight. I'm happy to change it, but the content you referred to as "insider information" came directly from the reference - I have no "insider information."

This does help a lot; I can get working on this and truly appreciate the assistance. Benetsee (talk) 14:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Any uninvolved editor may close most discussions,

As Any uninvolved editor can close the discussion, I have been waiting for several days to close the RfC for the link below. It seems that the administrator is busy, so if you are not involved in the RfC, please close it.

Talk:2024 United States presidential election#RfC: Trump infobox photo. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 11:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I see it's on rfcl. Waiting sucks, but it'll happen at some point. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Goodtiming8871, this isn't really the place, you can request a closure at Wikipedia:Requests for closure. Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 11:49, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

They did that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:55, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done. C F A 💬 14:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

ClueBot III question

How long will it take for {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} to make User:ClueBot III perform a bot edit to User talk:Ss0jse? Ss0jse (talk) 20:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

My understanding is that archiving activities run once per night. I know that's true for MiszaBot and it's replacement but I am not sure about ClueBot. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Anachronist: Wikipedia is a global project. It is never night for all of us at the same time. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:20, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I know. The servers are in the United States, however, and the load on the servers is highest during daytime in the United States. Bots that run once per day are best run when the load is lighter, at night in the United States. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Granted, I have been changing the settings multiple times in the past hour: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ss0jse&action=history Ss0jse (talk) 21:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Please archive this section, either manually or automatically

. Ss0jse (talk) 22:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Copyrighted image

I want to use a copyrighted image in Canada. In the description, it says that illustrating the symbol qualifies as fair use in the US. But is it fair use in Canadian copyright laws? WikiPhil012 (talk) 00:28, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you talking about using the image elsewhere on Wikipedia, or using it offwiki? jlwoodwa (talk) 05:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

On Wikipedia. WikiPhil012 (talk) 13:03, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Then it's not clear to me how Canadian copyright laws would be relevant. Could you give some more context, e.g. which image you want to use, and which article you want to use it on? jlwoodwa (talk) 17:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I live in Canada. So I must adhere to their laws. And I would like to use in in Draft:Coat of arms of Saskatoon. WikiPhil012 (talk) 18:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Then the Canadian laws are moot – that would violate Wikipedia policy. Specifically, Wikipedia's ninth non-free content criterion only allows fair use images on articles, not drafts. You'll have to wait until Draft:Coat of arms of Saskatoon is accepted. jlwoodwa (talk) 18:14, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation and fast replies jlwoodwa! WikiPhil012 (talk) 18:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Undeletions Article

Dear Wikipedia Support Team,

I am trying to restore my article, but I am currently unable to do so because my account is blocked from editing Wikipedia. Could you please unblock my account so that I can proceed with the necessary edits?

Thank you for your assistance.

Best regards Ishpreet kaur s (talk) 05:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

The account you posted this from is not blocked. Were you blocked under a different account? jlwoodwa (talk) 06:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I have sent the restoration request, please let me know further Ishpreet kaur s (talk) 06:33, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Ishpreet kaur s, jlwoodwa asked you a simple question. You have ignored it. Please answer it. -- Hoary (talk) 07:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Read WP:Appealing a block carefully. If the article you want to make doesn't meet WP-requirements, it will not be accepted. WP:BACKWARD may be of help to you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

My article was live for two years, but it was suddenly deleted by WP. Could you help me restore it? My account is also blocked Ishpreet kaur s (talk) 06:15, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

The Wikipedia page for Chandigarh Group of Colleges, Jhanjeri (CGC Jhanjeri) has been deleted. I am trying to restore the article, but my account is currently blocked. Could you please unblock my account so that I can edit the references and work on restoring the page? Additionally, could you advise on how we can proceed with the restoration? Ishpreet kaur s (talk) 06:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

For context, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chandigarh Group of Colleges, Jhanjeri. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

How can I restore my deleted article? Ishpreet kaur s (talk) 06:17, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

First, please name the account of yours that's blocked. -- Hoary (talk) 07:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Ishpreet kaur s, if you were blocked sitewide, you would not be able to post here to the Teahouse. And yet you are commenting here at the Teahouse. So, this account is clearly not blocked sitewide. Another possibility is that you have been pageblocked from some specific page, but the block log shows no such block. Your block log is clean. If you have been using more than one account, then please identify the others. That is the only way that we can evaluate your report accurately. Cullen328 (talk) 07:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

My username is manshacgc. Please check this account, as it has been blocked. I kindly request you to unblock my account or restore my article on the Chandigarh Group of Colleges, Jhanjeri, so that I can provide the proper references to Wikipedia. Ishpreet kaur s (talk) 08:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

You can appeal a block by posting on your own userpage at User_talk:Manshacgc#August_2024_2. I would suggest reading the Guide To Appealing Blocks first. Creating a new account to subvert a block is not appropriate. -- D'n'B-t -- 08:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I have blocked you, "Ishpreet kaur s", as a self-confessed puppet of Manshacgc. The template I added to your talk page says how you can appeal the block; but by creating new puppets you've been digging your own grave, so an appeal is very unlikely to succeed any time soon. If you create yet another puppet, this will be detected and most likely you will permanently be persona non grata. My suggestion: walk away from en:Wikipedia for a year or longer. -- Hoary (talk) 09:00, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

This is clearly a naive attempt to communicate with us, not malicious socking. Please AGF. Phrases like "digging your own grave" are not appropriate for the Teahouse. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Any admin who disagrees with the block I imposed is free to remove it without consulting me. -- Hoary (talk) 10:58, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I didn't disagree with your block; I was referring to your tone on this page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:12, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Apologies to all for the macabre metaphor. I plead sleepiness at the time. Note to any username listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Manshacgc: Do not create another username. Creating another would only worsen your prospects. -- Hoary (talk) 21:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Links

Today, I renamed an article. Currently, there are 192 links (excluding transclusion) which link to the old article name so is there any way to relink all of them in a faster way? This might be redundant but I just want to know. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 20:45, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Last time I renamed an article (about a week ago) some automated process did all that work for me. I suggest you go to the renamed article, click on "What links here", and see if the incoming links have been updated. Maproom (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I see that the link at Nuclear weapon has not (yet) been updated. Maybe it takes time? Maproom (talk) 21:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Yea, perhaps we should give it time. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 21:35, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Maproom, I'm not sure what you're seeing, but when I go to Special:WhatLinksHere for Bengal Armenians with redirects hidden, almost all the links disappear. Most are still through Armenians in Bangladesh. Where are you seeing an automated process changing redirects? That would run afoul of WP:COSMETICBOT. Folly Mox (talk) 21:44, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah I see you clarified below while I was typing 🙃 Nevermind then Folly Mox (talk) 21:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Redirects are WP:NOTBROKEN: there's no need to relink the new article title, and generally frowned upon to perform edits that contribute nothing other than bypassing redirects. Folly Mox (talk) 21:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I was wrong. The incoming links will be to a redirect – that's not a problem. The text in the links does not get changed. So Nuclear weapon now has this: "... the 1966 Palomares B-52 crash occurred when ...". That might be slightly confusing for a reader. A perfectionist might want to change the text at Nuclear weapon. (I wouldn't bother.) Maproom (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh, so I guess there is no reason to re-link all links then. Right? Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 21:49, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Guess I got my answer. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 22:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Ivebeenhacked: Your undiscussed move has been reverted. Your wanted name was rejected at Talk:1966 Palomares B-52 crash#Requested move. Even without a prior discussion, I would not have made that move without using Wikipedia:Requested moves. Your name has zero Google results outside Wikipedia. Don't make up a name for something just because you think your name is better than what it's called by sources. Wikipedia is based on sources. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:49, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes I'm aware of the revert. BilCat has told me in a nicer way. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 23:54, 31 August 2024 (UTC)