Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 826

Archive 820

←

Archive 824

Archive 825

Archive 826

Archive 827

Archive 828

→

Archive 830

Ranking of search results in Wikipedia

Hello and thanks to everyone in the tea house who have helped me so far. I am currently trying to understand how the search ranking works in a Wikipedia search. Specifically if I type in a search for "Ireland" why does the "Northern Ireland" page not come up either on the predicted prompts or the short list of results. A link to where I might better learn and understand how this works would be greatly appreciated, thanks. Eimhin de Róiste (talk) 04:36, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Eimhin de Róiste and welcome to the Teahouse.

Search ranking? I don't think the Wikimedia software does anything very sophisticated with the search box. It has a rather small capacity to get past misspellings, but otherwise seems to stick to presenting a list as if you were browsing an alphabetical list of the pages on WP whose initial string matches what you have typed so far. It may be that its ability to get past misspellings is only based on the existence of redirects from those misspellings. Since Google and most other search engines have indexed the article content of Wikipedia, that's where I would expect to go for higher-level search engine capabilities such as page ranking. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 06:13, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

The search mechanism baffles many people, Help:Searching, may contain something of use. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:29, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Eimhin de Róiste: If you look at the very bottom of the search box when you type 'Ireland' you'll see a line in italics beginning "containing..." Select that, and you'll get a list of search results often covering multiple pages containing article titles and contents with that term in. You'll see that Northern Ireland comes up second on the list. So never just rely on the simple string search in the search box. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the pointers, very helpful indeed. I must confess I stopped paying attention to methods to improve my searches back in days of Netscape Navigator and beyond the boolean and/or and use of "search term" I effectively stopped thinking about or learning ways to "power up"/make more effective searches. I will study further. Thanks for the guidance.Eimhin de Róiste (talk) 09:31, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Follow-up to Grand Ayatullah Syed Muhammad Yar Shah Naqvi Al Najafi

this isn't the place for a draft

Ayatullah Ustad-ul-Ulama Syed Muhammad Yar Shah Naqvi Najafi (born 1913 in Alipur, Panjab, died 12 Dec 1990 He Was a First Shia scholar In The History of Pakistani. He lived in Najaf Ashraf for a while before returning in 1940. All of Pakistan's ulamas are directly or indirectly the students of Ayatullah Muhammad Yar Shah Najfi.[citation needed] He was a simple man every time he work for his god. Once There was a Came Irani scholar in the Islamic instute of Dar_ul_Huda Ayatullah was sitting in the earth when he saw so he impressed for sitting on the earth he said this is a real change. Activities Majalis and teaching Tazkra e Toheed Masaib e Al-Muhammad a.s Specially he recite Masaib janab e Sayyeda Prominent disciples Allama Gulaab Ali Shah Naqvi (of Multan) Allama Muhammad Safder (Chakwal) Allama Hussain Bakhsh Najafi Jara Allama Akhtar Abbas Najfi (Lahore) Allama Muhammad Hussain Najafi (Dhakkoo) (Sargodha) Allama Syed Safdar Hussain Najafi (Lahore) Allama Riaz Hussain Naqvi Najafi (Lahore) (son-in-law, disciple) Allama Naseer Hussain Najafi (Sargodha) Allama Gulam Hassan Najafi Jarra (D I khan) Allama Hafiz Syed Muhammad Sibtain Naqvi Qummi-Najafi (son, disciple) Allama Hafiz Syed Muhammad Hasnain Naqvi Qummi (son, disciple) Allama Hafiz Syed Muhammad Saqlain Naqvi Qummi(Shaheed) (son, disciple) Allama Hafiz Syed Muhammad Sayyedain Naqvi (son, disciple) AllamaSajid Ali Naqvi AllamaSamar Hassan Zaidi of Karachi AllamaGhulam Hussain Najfi Shaheed (Lahore) AllamaMalik Ijaz Hussain Najafi (Khushab) AllamaMuhammad Hussain Marhoom of sidhoo pura fisal aabad AllamaKhadim Husain Shirazi of jalal pur nangiyana sargodha AllamaNiaz Hussain Naqvi Qummi (chief justice Iran, son-in-law, disciple) AllamaHassan Raza Ghadeeri (London) AllamaFayyaz Hussain Naqvi Qummi (Karachi) Allama Muhammad Ismaeel AllamaBaqir Hussain Naqvi (br/o mohsin e milat) AllamaAmeer Hussain Hussaini (Karachi) AllamaMureed Hussain Naqvi (Denmark) References

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Naqvi syed512 (talk • contribs) 10:08, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

This isn't the place for a draft, so I have collapsed its display (and terminated the unterminated "reference" to prevent it upsetting the display of the rest of the page). --David Biddulph (talk) 10:17, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

The place to suggest improvements to the existing article is at Talk:Muhammad Yar Shah. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

How do I create an entry for a new topic?

Good morning,

I wrote an op-ed on an economic policy in use by the US government without a name nor defined rules.

The op-ed will be out tomorrow, and I would like to submit the information herein. I write for the Eureka Springs Independent newspaper, www.Eureka.News

Kindly,

Dr. Luis Contreras Eureka Springs, AR 72631 <personal info redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeanDoc (talk • contribs) 13:31, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I'm afraid what you're proposing isn't suitable for submission on Wikipedia. Wikipedia hosts encyclopedic articles, not opinion editorials. It's also not suitable for policies "without a name nor defined rules", since they must be notable (i.e. mentioned in multiple secondary and reliable sources) to have an article. Thanks, Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 13:56, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello LeanDoc and welcome to the Teahouse-a great place to ask questions like the one above. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a publishing platform for editorials or op ed pieces. In addition, it is highly recommended that you do not create an article for which you have a conflict of interest. Even if you were able to get your op ed piece onto Wikipedia, it would be highly edited and then become something very different than your op ed piece. That is the bad news. The good news is that you are very welcome to add information to Wikipedia. If you can provide references to support information on a topic, then you can add information to the topic. We love new editors. I hope you decide to stay. Best Regards, Barbara ✐  ✉ 14:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

My first authored article

I would value feedback from experienced Editors on the draft article in my Sandbox:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AWCzarnik/sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by AWCzarnik (talk • contribs) 13:05, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, AWCzarnik and thank you for leaving your question here in the Teahouse. What you have written is not an encyclopedia article. It also appears to be written by you and actually may disappear rather quickly because it appears to be a personal attack. I am sorry to tell you this bad news. I hope you will stay with us and add content that is informative, not about yourself or your grievances. You seem intelligent and your participation in building an encyclopedia is very welcome. Barbara ✐  ✉ 14:05, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict):Hello, AWCzarnik and welcome to our Teahouse, and thanks for inviting comments on your sandbox draft. My first impression was that you have attempted to take advantage of Wikipedia to further awareness of a legal case which you personally brought against your employer, and that this was a terrible Conflict of Interest and a cynical abuse of what Wikipedia is trying to present to the world. That said (and never working in legal circles here or anywhere else) I eventually saw (with help from your sandbox's edit summary) that you were not doing that, but were attempting to demonstrate a significant and 'notable' change in U.S. law with which you, personally, had been involved as the plaintiff. So I don't quite agree with what Barbara (WVS) says above (and have just invited her to remove the WP:CSD G10 attack page deletion notice, which I think was wrongly placed, albeit in very good faith.) I gradually came to see your case might be likely to meet our essential 'notability' criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (law), specifically, WP:CASES in which it may be (and I paraphrase): the subject of a reasoned opinion of the highest court of a country, state or province, or has set a legal precedent that is formally binding. Others with more experience will be better equipped to make that assessment of notability, but I'd suggest you stand a good chance, assuming the court decision was a high enough one, or has had sufficient impact.

That said, I think you've gone about it all wrong, and it is a shame that such a heavily involved and high-profile person such as a yourself should be writing it. We have a law-orientated Wikiproject at Wikipedia:WikiProject Law, which recommends requested articles be added to Wikipedia:Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Law, which is what I would be recommending you to do - possibly linking back to your sandbox for background, in the hope someone unconnected would be interested in creating it.

Were you to continue, you must clearly declare your WP:COI, and restructure and perhaps precis the article to make it encyclopaedic.

In particular, a WP:LEDE is needed to introduce the subject - never leave the key conclusion to the last paragraph - this isn't a scientific paper! With a title that follows the style of other legal case articles, such as Czarnik v. Illumina it should begins roughly along the lines of: Czarnik v. Illumina was a 2006 legal case in the United States which set a precedent by establishing for the first time that reputational harm alone was sufficient to satisfy the standing requirement to bring a correction of inventorship claim. As at 2018, Czarnik v. Illumina has been cited by nine other courts since then, and cited in legal treatises. Background: Heard in 2006, the claim .....

I would also advise you to spend a little more time learning the basics here before you think about creating articles. We expect a certain structural layout and style to be followed, and every key statement needs to be supported with citations. At present your references are just hyperlinks in the text, and you need to provide good links to help editors assess notability. If there was coverage in the national media of the legal precedent being set, these should be cited too. So, check WP:CASES, read Wikipedia:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. I see you've started The Wikipedia Adventure. Do finish it - you have 13 more badges to attain, and along the way you'll get to understand the basics of editing, referencing, layout and style. I hope this helps somewhat.

If, in due course, you choose to commit to sharing your extensive knowledge and skills within Wikipedia, as your userpage suggests, I'd respectfully suggest you might wish to consider seeking a mentor to Adopt and guide you. Our adoption scheme for new editors is very much in the doldrums these days (having been superseded by virtually instant help fora like this Teahouse), but I think you could be a perfect candidate to support if you demonstrate long-term commitment, and I for one would be happy to help out should you ever need that general assistance. Don't waste your time adding an 'adopt me' template to your userpage - these really don't work; simply find an editor with comparable interests - and there are quite a few listed at WP:AAU, and approach them directly. Oh, and don't forget to sign every talk page and noticeboard post with your signature. You simply type four tildes (like this: ~~~~) and the sofware add name and timestamp automatically for you. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:15, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Fantastic feedback, and so fast. Thank you! A.W. Czarnik — Preceding unsigned comment added by AWCzarnik (talk • contribs) 14:42, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Ooops. AWCzarnik (talk) 14:53, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome, AWCzarnik. You'll now see that, having left it a short while, I eventually removed the WP:CSD G10 template from your sandbox, placed there in good faith by another editor, and left some further advice on the sandbox's talk page. (That's a whole afternoon gone. Hey ho.) Nick Moyes (talk) 16:02, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Not founded

I created one article about me and publish it but when i went back to google it I did not find it I have created a wikipedia on myself How to find it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhishek A singh (talk • contribs) 16:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Abhishek A singh: You created a user page, not an article.

See WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY and WP:COI for why we discourage users from creating articles about themselves. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:40, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Need to edit a URL in an article

Good Afternoon,

I received an email concerning an out of date URL for a link in the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Carroll_Napier

James Carroll Napier. 

The link is Ref #9.  I have the correct URL (http://dsi.mtsu.edu/trials/napier)   but am unable to get access to the Ref list to change it.  Is it something to do with my account / permission that I can't see the actual References and edit them.  I've edited text etc but never had to change something in a Reference list. 

Any help would be appreciated so that the correct link can be displayed to our collection at MTSU. I'm more than willing to learn how to do this!

Jean Reese, Librarian MTSU — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjr524 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Mjr524: Citations are not in the "References" section but in the article body. Reference #9 is located in the "Career" section. If you got to edit that section and look at the reference after ", serving on the Nashville City Council," there's the area you want to edit.

You might want to try WP:The Wikipedia Adventure, as it has a section on creating and editing citations. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:42, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Categorizing a single item in a list

How should this be handled? Say i want to put List_of_games_in_Star_Trek#Fizzbin into Category:Games_with_concealed_rules

Would I put the category onto the page, or would I put it somewhere within Fizzbin´s entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MoonyTheDwarf (talk • contribs) 12:55, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi MoonyTheDwarf, welcome to the Teahouse. A section cannot be added to a category but a redirect to the section can. Fizzbin already redirects to the section. See Help:Redirect#Creating and editing redirects and Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:57, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Find on page

How do I find a string on the page I'm editing? Jmar67 (talk) 19:04, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Jmar67: I just use the browser's find feature by pressing CTRL+F, and then typing the string in there. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:06, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

I am using Safari on mobile and do not know how to do that. Any idea? Jmar67 (talk) 19:12, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Jmar67: I don't have a device for testing but my first Google hit on Safari find is https://www.lifewire.com/search-for-text-in-safari-on-iphone-2000562. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I tend to forget Google. Jmar67 (talk) 20:06, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Problematic disambiguation terms

Please see here and share some views. I'm posting here because both experienced users see this as well as newcomers who, like me, can learn from this.

Cheers.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:23, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

This question has now been answered on the linked to page. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:29, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

How to see truncated edit summaries in full

Hi. I'm looking at the page curation log (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/pagetriage-curation) where some edit summaries are truncated with an ellipsis, e.g. "Thanks for your new article on Rafe Pomerance, but more evidence of his notability is needed, such as commentary on his influence over l..." How can I see the rest of what was truncated? Cheers, Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 16:32, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Clayoquot, welcome to the Tehouse. Look for an edit made at the same time to the talk page of the article author. In your example it is [1]. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:41, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks :) Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 21:35, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

ThinkWave

Hello, i'm a new editor here and my first article was deleted and received a notice in my talk page that if i have any question i can ask in Wikipedia:Questions and through it i found the teahouse page , so i want to follow rules to prevent it to happen again. Now i have an idea about article for ThinkWave.com it's a school management software, so i want to know is that will be a good idea to create this article also i'm planing to use these references

1. https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/thinkwave#section-overview
2. https://www.thefreelibrary.com/ThinkWave+Kicks+Off+School+Year+With+Expanded+and+Enhanced+Service.-a065495052
3. https://www.owler.com/company/thinkwave
4. https://www.prweb.com/releases/thinkwave/school-software-gradebook/prweb4987644.htm
5. https://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/18/business/really-plugged-in-people-reveal-really-useful-web-sites.html
6. https://www.thinkwave.com/company.html
7. https://rb.ru/news/kto-aleksandr-borodich/

it that enough or should i search for higher quality resources. Thanks Justletters (talk) 01:48, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

In my opinion, 1-6 all 'No'. Not brief mentions, not press releases, not the company's own website, etc. Number 7 is really 'No' because, well, Russian. David notMD (talk) 16:26, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Justletters There is nothing wrong with using Russian sources if nothing better is available in English. In this specific instance though, the source only briefly mentions ThinkWave as a former employer of the subject of their article. It cannot be used for anything other than a statement like "Alexander Borodich worked as a web developer for ThinkWave", which is probably pretty useless. I would urge you to familiarize yourself with our notability guideline for companies and organizations, WP:NCORP. It explains these kinds of issues really well. Vexations (talk) 19:12, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Vexations and David notMD thanks for your help i really appreciate that, it would be more helpful if you can confirm even ThinkWave deserve to have article on wikipedia or not Justletters (talk) 20:51, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Justletters An article based on only the sources listed above would very likely be deleted. Press releases and the website of the subject are not reliable sources. Vexations (talk) 21:01, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Vexations Yes, I got it. So if i have an article idea can i ask editors to search about it and create it if it notable enough. I think i saw a page before speaking about that but i can't found now Justletters (talk) 21:31, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

You can submit an idea at Wikipedia:Requested articles but it could take months to years before an editor decided to create such an article. The great majority of editors work on improving some of the 5,000,000+ articles in the English language Wikipedia, or in other languages. Sadly, it is common for people to become editors specifically to create a new article on a topic of their own interest (sometimes, themselves), not realizing how hard it is to create an article. David notMD (talk) 21:53, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

As you said it's really hard to become an editor need to have the knowledge of the community and it's rules, I'm looking at the editors here in the Teahouse and how they are helping each other just for editing love .. really a pure community and i want to have my role on it. Thanks again for your help. Justletters (talk) 22:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Ancient Origins

Is the website Ancient Origings www.ancient-origins.net concidered a reliable source? --WikiDitscha 22:23, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiDitscha (talk • contribs) 17:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@WikiDitscha: In the future, you can ask such questions at WP:RSN.

Looking over the front page, I'm seeing:

• Advertisements for books on Ancient astronauts.
• this article in support of the discredited Pope Joan hoax.
• this opinion piece that acknowledges that Tarot cards are only about 600 years old (and occult interpretation about half that) but still insists that it's "ancient" wisdom.
• this article claiming the Jordan Lead Codices are authentic (even though both the Israeli antiquities authority and the Jordanian archaeological department agree they're forgeries)

I'm gonna say this is a WP:FRINGE site and so generally not a reliable source. I'm confident that WP:RSN would say likewise. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:31, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

• It's a mix of reprinted press releases about real archaeology, all of which can be found in much better sources, and absolute bullshit like the above. So no. – Joe (talk) 18:24, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

How do I request someone to write an article on my behalf if I have a conflict of interest?

Hi, I want to create a page about a website that creates customizable promotional graphics for small businesses, musicians, event promoters, churches, non-profit organizations etc. but I cannot do so myself due to a personal conflict of interest. I researched on this and found out that the best way to go about it is to request someone from the Wikipedia community to write the article on your behalf by providing them the basic information and a list of external links that talk about the website. How do I proceed ahead with this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alina Jamshed (talk • contribs) 11:33, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Alina Jamshed, and welcome to our Teahouse. Thank you for your question and especially for taking the trouble to appreciate our concerns over articles created by editors with a Conflict of Interest, or who might own or be employed by an organisation and who then need to observe our requirements to declare Paid Editing. The route for you to recommend an article be created is to add it to the long list in the relevant sub-section at Wikipedia:Requested articles. But, be aware that we are all volunteers here, and that editors choose the topics that interest them. So there is often be a very long wait.

I should also tell you - based on what you've just said above - that unless you've missed out something critical - there's absolutely no chance of your organisation ever meeting our notability criteria for organisations. You can read what they are at WP:NORG. You'll need to be able to provide or point towards in-depth coverage for that organisation in sources that are totally independent of it, and ignore all coverage based on promotional press releases, interviews by staff etc. So, I might respectfully invite you to consider whether your company really is sufficiently notable to merit an article here, so as not to waste your time, or to raise expectations. There must be tens of thousands of companies around the world who produce promotional graphics for other organisations - an encyclopaedia like ours isn't really the place for anyone to expect to get free promotion. So, unless it really does stand out from the crowd, I'd look elsewhere to promote your company - especially to websites where you'd have complete control over content, unlike here. I hope this makes sense and doesn't disappoint too much. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:22, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes:,Nick Moyes Hey Nick! I understand your concern but I'm not looking for promotional content for the website. I only want to create an informative page about PosterMyWall (https://www.postermywall.com) as a graphic design tool solely. I see that there are pages on Wikipedia for some of the other graphic-design tool websites such as: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canva https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucidpress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Spark

If I provide the required information, can someone completely neutral write the article on our behalf, if it interests them, ofcourse?

Hi Alina Jamshed, you can certainly add PosterMyWall to WP:Requested articles. The key thing is to include a few independent references (newspaper coverage, that kind of thing) that an editor could base an article on. › Mortee _talk 00:08, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

article declined

I recently wrote my first article and requested to publish which was denied. I admit it lacked citation what can I do now! Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robeda (talk • contribs) 16:21, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Robeda, and welcome to the Teahouse. Read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources if you haven't, and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Gather the best reliable sources you can and cite them in the your draft, guidance at Help:Referencing for beginners. If there are no (or not enough) reliable sources to find, give up (at least for now, things change) on writing an article on this topic, it will be deleted. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:24, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Two suggestions: 1) you should not have so much personal information on your User page. What belongs there is information about how you intend to be a Wikipedia editor; and 2) you moved the information about Sayat from your User page to a Draft, but as it has no references, cannot become an article. See the advice GGS provided. David notMD (talk) 00:09, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Finding foreign language wikis that need translation

I'd like to work on foreign language pages in French or Spanish that need translation into English. Is there a simple way to find a list of such pages? Thanks! HarleyOpenRoad (talk) 06:19, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello HarleyOpenRoad and welcome to the teahouse. Take a look at Category:Articles needing translation from French Wikipedia and Category:Articles needing translation from Spanish Wikipedia for a list of current articles that can use some translation help. Happy editing. MarnetteD|Talk 07:18, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi HarleyOpenRoad. In addition to the advice given by MarnetteD, you might also want to look at WP:TRANSLATE for some general information on translating articles from other language Wikipedias into English Wikipedia. You should pay particular attention to WP:TFOLWP since you will likely need to provide proper attribution to the original source article you are translating. Finally, even though the various different language Wikipedia projects are all part of the same "family" so to speak, each is governed by its own sets of policies and guidelines. These various policies and guidelines may be quite similar in many ways, but there might also be some very important differences as well. The policies and guidelines of English Wikipedia tend to be (on average) much more stringent that the ones of some other projects; this is particularly true when it comes to Wikipedia notability guidelines and standards related to reliable sources. So, just because an article about a particular subject already exists on another Wikipedia is not a 100% guarantee that the same article should also be created and added to English Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:55, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Peer Review - Request for reviewers

Wikipedia ads	file info – #14

Wikipedia peer review needs more reviewers. Please join us and contribute some reviews, or add yourself to our volunteers list to get regular updates of unanswered reviews.

Peer review provides a way for new and experienced editors alike to ask for and provide input into an article that is being developed. It's often a stepping stone for new editors, or for articles on their way to featured article status. It's a great way to help new editors become experienced with our wiki ways, improve articles, and learn about completely new subject areas.

We usually have between 10 - 20 unanswered reviews, often waiting for months, that only require a pair of eyes and some kind advice. We look forward to seeing you around!

Yours, --Tom (LT) (talk) 07:13, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

no need to answer - this is just a test as part of a discussion about new users

problem problem problem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerry Raymond (talk • contribs) 04:59, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Turning Sounds

I reviewed Draft:Turning Sounds and declined it as not satisfying event notability and because the references did not appear to be independent. The author, User:Baskak, replied on my talk page, asking me to clarify and reconsider. I am asking if other experienced editors, whether or not AFC reviewers, can look at the draft and advise me and the author whether it should be accepted.

Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 09:13, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, @Robert McClenon: - I reviewed your decision, and I believe you were correct. The only source that appeared both reliable and covered Turning Sounds itself in detail was this one, I believe. As a second Glissando source wouldn't be intellectually independent I don't think that would be sufficient to push it over notability-wise. However this doesn't include analysis of the second ref, which I couldn't find accessible online.

I don't think this is sufficient to demonstrate notability.

Some clarification to the editor on specific sources (primary, not-reliable like myspace & blogs etc etc) would probably be helpful.

WP:TEAHOUSE is a good place to send editors who want some help improving their draft, but in cases where you stand by your decision (or are unsure) and they still want a review, Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk is probably the best place to send them.

Hope my AFC $0.02 has been at least partially helpful. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:57, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, @Robert McClenon: and @Nosebagbear:, editor here. In light of the above I have to reiterate what I already submitted to @Robert McClenon:. First of all, I have pointed out that the sources I gave are very respectable national-level media. I'm convinced that among the editors of the English Wikipedia there should be ones familiar with those. We're talking about "Gazeta Wyborcza" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gazeta_Wyborcza), "Odra" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odra_(magazine)), "Ruch Muzyczny" (https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruch_Muzyczny ) and "Tygodnik Powszechny" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tygodnik_Powszechny). I presume, that calling these sources non-independent would actually seem to be in conflict with these entries and their compliance with Wikipedia's policy. If you find it necessary, I'd be happy to arrange and provide scans of relevant articles for you to veryfy its content in reference to the event in question. Hence, could I get some specific rationale for classifying these titles as non-independent?

I would also like to strongly oppose the suggestion, that I, the editor, hasn't done my homework regarding the sources. I did, and that's where I learned that (the aforementioned) independent sources are to be invoked, and they are referenced there and relied on. The other kind of sources (such as programme booklets) are referenced only for backing factual details, and I'm convinced in this case it's better to reference such sources than none. I guess it's quite obvious, that no media report from an event is going to include all the performers/compositions etc. Please note, in addition, that the MySpace page referenced was the main webpage for the event cycle mentioned, hence it would be counterproductive to not reference it at all - I believe it's Wikipedia policy to direct users to official sites of the subjects decribed.

In addition, it's important to note that the work on the draft is in progress, and there will be more sources referenced, of similar notability. However, I guess in the Wikipedia spirit it would be advisable if other interested users (and I believe there are many) would chip-in with their input. Thank you. Baskak (talk) 12:47, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

"Do not remove this line!"

Hi!

I was looking at the Video Star page, and was about to start changing some of the "-" to "–", and I noticed that above the Infobox, there were two lines saying "Do not remove this line!" with an empty line underneath each one.

Is it acceptable to remove the empty lines underneath the "Do not remove this line!"? The two empty lines underneath each "Do not remove this line!" leave a weird gap at the top of the article page.

Thank you!

Best, JHY0 (talk) 13:58, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

The blank lines, and those 2 comment lines, can be removed. They are relics from when the article was an AFC draft, and they weren't tidied up when the article was published. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:06, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Broadcast Listings

I'm curious about the WP:NOTRADIOGUIDE rule. Concerning the article about the British radio station BBC Radio 1, one editor (sometimes as an IP) is heavily engaged to fill the article with long lists of programmes and broadcast slots. This seems to me to fall foul of the rules — is this interpretation correct, or are frequently changing lists of programmes acceptable in an artticle? Earlier this year I did try to contest the edits but an edit war ensued and I had to bow out to keep the peace. I've managed to tag the article with Template:Schedule but I daren't step in, as experience suggests these programme lists are jealously guarded. So I thought I'd ask if anyone else had a view about programme listings. Cnbrb (talk) 09:33, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Cnbrb:, this sounds like a content dispute, the best way to deal with these is to discuss the matter on the talk page of the article in question, instead of getting in to edit war. If discussion on tke talk page doest not resolve the issue, then follow the guide at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Iffy★Chat -- 13:09, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I had left it a long time so it didn't seem like an immediate dispute. I was actually wondering if I was interpreting the WP:NOTRADIOGUIDE rule too strictly and if there was something I had misunderstood, such was the determination of the other editor. I'll see how it goes and take it to Dispute resolution if needed, as you suggest. Thanks. Cnbrb (talk) 14:36, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Help with wikitables

Hi, still relatively new to wikipedia, I found something on a page I wanted to change but wasn't sure how to do it, I've experimented a little in my userspace and this is the closest I've gotten:

Country	parties and organizations	Note
Ireland	Irish Republican Socialist Party	socialism, Irish Republicanism
	Labour Party	member of Socialist International
	Sinn Féin	democratic socialism, social democracy, Irish Republicanism
Northern Ireland		democratic socialism, social democracy, Irish Republicanism
	Social Democratic and Labour Party	social democracy, Irish nationalism

But I want for the 2 note rows of Sinn Féin instead to be a single row. How would I do this?

Thanks,

Melias C (talk) 15:21, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Melias C. You need to insert rowspan="2" | before the first note, and delete the whole of the second one, including the '|' at the beginning. --ColinFine (talk) 15:54, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

More guidance at Help:Table#Cells_spanning_multiple_rows_or_columns. Is the result below what you wanted? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:13, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Country	parties and organizations	Note
Ireland	Irish Republican Socialist Party	socialism, Irish Republicanism
	Labour Party	member of Socialist International
	Sinn Féin	democratic socialism, social democracy, Irish Republicanism
Northern Ireland
	Social Democratic and Labour Party	social democracy, Irish nationalism

Draft:Palais Kaunitz-Wittgenstein, and an editor needs reassurance that drafts are always being edited

I reviewed Draft:Palais Kaunitz-Wittgenstein. I said that the palace did appear to be historically notable, but left it for another reviewer due to the conflict of interest. The author, User:WiR IACA, then replied on my talk page letting me know that they had made edits to the article. I replied that I do not normally follow a draft through the approval process. (Besides that, I was letting another reviewer review.) They replied: “I am aware that following a draft would not be the classical behavior, I just wanted to make sure that your remark does not seem to be improper due to a possible worsening of the draft through my continued editing. I am begging your pardon for any inconvenience and disruption.” This left me confused further. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Robert_McClenon#Draft:Palais_Kaunitz-Wittgenstein for the details. I now have a two-part request. First, is another experienced editor willing to review the draft with regard to notability and tone? I think that it is historically notable. Although COI editors usually edit non-neutrally, I think that the case of a historical structure may be one where it is easy enough for a non-neutral editor to edit neutrally. Second, can someone reassure the other editor that editing a draft while it is in the review process is the normal state? They seem to be worried that I will find that the draft isn’t what it was when I reviewed it, but the review process always works like that, and a reviewer should know to look at the history. Maybe they need to be told that they don’t need to get permission from all of the previous reviewers to have edited the draft after it was reviewed. Comments?

Robert McClenon (talk) 19:16, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Robert McClenon. In my view, the draft article created by WiR IACA is very definitely about a notable topic - i.e. a historic building. There are many sources like this one which assist in establishing this. Unfortunately, Lukas Weinbeer's command of English appears not to assist him. I recognise he has also edited the German version, but his English version is hardly adequate for a mainspace article. Whilst I accept that WP:AFC criteria generally ignore language skills, I would urge the editor to work on this whilst waiting for further review. I'm sure then there would be no problem in accepting it into mainspace. I have absolutely no worries about a draft article being worked on whilst still under review. This is quite normal. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:04, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Nick Moyes. I thought that part of my problem in understanding what User:WiR IACA was saying had to do with their command of English. However, I also think that their concern that I would find the text of the draft to be different than what I had reviewed showed a lack of understanding on their part of the review process, which is that of course a draft is always being edited (and, for that matter, an article may also always be edited). Robert McClenon (talk) 02:37, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

To my understanding of the COI-policies, paid-editors are advised not to edit a page directly. If the article on the palais was moved to main space, I would have hence suggested my edits through the request-edit process. Editing a draft in the AfC-process seemed to bear the risk to appear like an attempt of editing an article directly. As Robert McClenon, however, already clarified the situation on their talk page, I came to the conclusion that I might have been a little bit too worried --WiR IACA (talk) 06:50, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, WiR IACA, as the Wikipedian in Residence at the Anti-corruption Agency you do have an obligation to declare your involvement with that organisation - and you've done that clearly and effectively (there's a wonderful irony there). But it is inevitable that a WiR is going to be remunerated (paid) for articles that they are writing about. I really don't think you need to make edit requests for every change you want to make. You, of course, have a very great responsibility to write in a neutral, non-promotional manner, and I'm sure you will do just that. Good luck with your residency. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:37, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Nick Moyes for your clarification.
I also tried to clean up the clumsily written parts of the draft. Working with German books only, while writing in English leads to confusion, especially when several parts should fit into one text, even though they do not really...
Hopefully the clean-up was at least partially successful, would be glad not to be remembered as this one WiR who didn't know English :) --WiR IACA (talk) 10:31, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

No worries. I only ever managed to create one article on de.wiki. Your English is far better than my German - and that was with the assistance of Google translate, too! Feel free in the future to ask someone to cast an eye over anything you might have concerns over. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:11, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Nick Moyes, User:WiR IACA - A COI editor should not edit an article directly. A draft is not an article. COI editors are told to use the AFC process and draft space. I didn't need to be told about edits to a draft, which was still being reviewed. Drafts are always being edited, and are not articles, just prospective articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:55, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Can you help create an article?

Can you help me create an article and publish on wikipedia? I tried myself and it got deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kors05 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Start by signing your question with the username you created the article with by adding 4~ without blanks to the end of the question, so your editing history can be seen. I added 4~ without blanks and WP added a signature: Geo8rge (talk) 16:34, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

An editor, not me, thought ZectaBridge was not notorious, famous, or important enough to have an article on Wikipedia. Why is ZectaBridge important? If you believe the article should exist, when you have collected the best sources supporting that contact the editor that deleted it.Geo8rge (talk) 16:44, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Kors05. Welcome, and thanks for bringing your question to the Teahouse. I've been editing on Wikipedia for over seven years, but I'm afraid I would meet with the same lack of success, were I to try to create an article for you on the company called ZectaBridge. You must have seen the detailed explanation on your Talk Page here? It told you that there was no evidence that this company meets our notability criteria for businesses. We aren't here to help people promote their favourite company, and you can read more about these criteria at this link: WP:NORG. I couldn't even get the company website to load up on my computer, but doubt you will find reliable sources that are totally independent of that company that talk about it "in depth". (i.e. ignore all company press releases, blogs and other social media content - we don't care a fig about what these say) If you can do that, and find good sources, you may have a chance. But without them, neither you nor I stand any chance whatsoever of an article remaining here on Wikipedia. I'm sorry to disappoint you - but that's not what this encyclopaedia is for. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:52, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

User:Kors05 - Did you read my comments on your talk page? I said that the draft had no references, and that it read like an information brochure about the company. References are needed to establish corporate notability. I tagged the draft for deletion as advertising. Administrator User:Deb then reviewed the draft and agreed that it was advertising, and deleted it. Did you read her comments on your talk page? She asked whether you were affiliated with ZectaBridge. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Question from Blackbird923

how do you make that information thing on the side? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackbird923 (talk • contribs) 17:30, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Blackbird923, since this is a separate question from the one above, I've given it its own heading. The boxes on the right hand side of many articles are called "infoboxes". You can read about them at Help:Infobox. For Draft:Boeing-Canada 213 Totem, you might want to look at a similar article, say Boeing 314 Clipper, to see how it's been done there. By the way, it looks like you submitted the draft for review when you first started it. I'm going to decline the draft for now because it's not ready to be published just yet. It needs some references first, to verify the facts and to show that the aircraft is notable. There'll be a 'resubmit' button to press once you think it's done. I'll add a welcome template to your talk page that includes some links to other handy resources. I hope this helps. Best of luck with the article! › Mortee _talk 17:56, 5 September 2018 (UTC) PS: you can sign your messages with ~~~~

General Content Question

Hello! This is my first time trying to post anything on Wikipedia so please bear with me if I'm asking a "stupid" question. My grandpa's friend (elderly) asked me to see if I can upload an article for him on Wikipedia. The more I read about the types of information that is accepted, the more I believe that his article will not be allowed. The article is about his personal account of a series of events dealing with Jim Jones. The article has a 1980 copyright and has been uploaded to another website previously. I believe this would be classified as a personal essay but I just wanted to be sure. Is there a way to link the current online article to the existing page on Jim Jones? Thank you for you help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lllitke (talk • contribs) 19:32, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

@Lllitke: Yep, we don't take original research and we generally can't take copyrighted material. If the article was professionally published, depending on where and how it might qualify as a reliable source for the article on Jim Jones. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:42, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

What to do to keep your article on Wikipedia?

Hi guys how to edit a biography and not be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HonnestWorld (talk • contribs) 20:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Write an article about a person who already has enough source material about their lives to support a quality biography. That is, find someone whose life is already documented in places like books and journal articles and newspapers and other reliable sources, and then write about THEM. If a person's life has not been sufficiently documented through reliable, in-depth, and independent writing already, then Wikipedia will not have an article about that person. The trick is not in your writing, it is in choosing the correct subject. See this page for more information. --Jayron32 20:19, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Search data and also the growth of mobile users

Hello, I hope you can tell me how to get data about how readers typically get to an article page? perhaps percentage of results from external search engines google etc (or the other (possibly) mainstream search engines) versus the percentage of people finding articles via the wiki search function, not including following links between wiki pages. I would also be very interested to know, what are the growth metrics for mobile readers, how common are mobile readers (also interested in mobile editor figures) and the growth rates of mobile quarter by quarter or any data in these areas. Thanks so much in advance. Eimhin de Róiste (talk) 10:24, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

@Eimhin de Róiste: - I can only offer a partial answer, I am afraid. Pageviews Analysis, part of the WMF Tools, can split pageviews over any user-determined timeframe between desktop, mobile, and app users, so that could be used to assemble data. Here is the data for the Teahouse itself, for instance. The WP:5000 includes data for the 5000 most viewed articles each week, including mobile views. On the editing side, there is xtools -Here is the Teahouse data, but this does say much about whether the edits where on mobile or not. If there is a tool to aid you, it is likely here somewhere. Sorry that this hasn't been too much help for your specific query, but hope it helps in some way, Stormy clouds (talk) 12:11, 5 September 2018 (UTC).

@Stormy clouds: Thanks so much, there is plenty there to keep me going for ages, a great help 😉.Eimhin de Róiste (talk) 21:23, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Is there a way to find every article that uses a specific infobox template? I want to test proposed changes and make sure existing infoboxes do not break.

Is there a way to find every article that uses a specific infobox? I want to test proposed changes in my sandbox area and make sure existing infoboxes do not break.Geo8rge (talk) 16:08, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Geo8rge. Welcome to our Teahouse. It might have been helpful if you'd told us which Infobox are you considering making changes to? Some (like Template:Infobox person) are used across tens or even hundreds of thousands of pages, and should be treated very carefully indeed. You are right to want to test proposed changes in your sandbox, but you should also discuss proposed changes on the talk page of the relevant infobox.

To either count the number of usages, or to see a list of every pages deploying (i.e. transcluding) a certain template, simply go to that template page (e.g. Template:Infobox climber) On the far left of the page, look in the 'Tools' section and click 'What links here'. By default, this shows the first 50 pages, and you can view up to 500 pages at a time. To get a count of how many times that template has been deployed on pages, on the results page, click 'Transclusion count', which takes you to this external tool which tells you that 153 instances have been found. Whereas Template:Infobox person is in use on 312,634 pages. So do tread carefully, please! Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:37, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Template:Infobox_United_States_District_Court_case A user asked a year ago that defense counsel be added to the infobox, I think I can handle that and edit source has not been disabled. There is also a Template:Infobox_US_court_case, so I wonder if changes to one template would make it incompatible with the other template, if that is important.

A more complicated issue is that an earlier editor mentioned in the documentation that the image for the court should update automatically when the name of the court is entered. It doesn't because the code in the documentation was never added. But I am not expert enough in template code to tell if what is in the documentation works. Geo8rge (talk) 16:57, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

I see the counter, but I am interested in the actual articles so I can copy the infobox to my sandbox and see what happens when I alter the sandbox version of my template.Geo8rge (talk) 17:16, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

@Geo8rge: I'm afraid I'm not knowledgeable enough in templates to be able to advise you much further. But here is your list of the 160 pages currently using that template. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:02, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks that is what I was looking forGeo8rge (talk) 23:50, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

How to handle repeated deletion of material?

Hi, I recently wrote the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_News_Wire, but recently, I've been having issues with a user who seems to have been created solely to delete material in the article without justification beyond "tweak wording". How should I handle this? Am I being too defensive of my work? I spent quite a bit of time putting this together, so having my writing repeatedly deleted for no reason by has me a bit irked. I'm still relatively new myself, so I'm not sure I'm handling this dispute properly. Thisdangguy (talk) 22:54, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Thisdangguy and welcome to the Teahouse.

Neither you nor your other editors have started a discussion about these issues on the talk page of the article: Talk:Your News Wire. So I'd have to agree that you're not handling this dispute properly. Any time you find yourself reverted or making corrections more than once, it's a sign that you should be opening a dialogue on the talk page. Anything else is just some sort of edit warring and edit summaries are inadequate for carrying on the needed conversation. I'm not going to look into or comment on the content in question until at least one of you has opened up a talk page discussion laying out their point of view on the relevant content and sources that back it up. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:14, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

@Jmcgnh:, makes sense, thanks. I've opened a dialogue on the talk page, let me know if that's what you had in mind. Thisdangguy (talk) 01:38, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

How many warnings to get blocked?

How many warnings to get blocked? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.136.145.202 (talk) 12:41, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no certain number of warnings that must be given before a block is issued; it all depends on the situation. Usually, it will be a few, but if the behavior at issue is particularly egregious, few or even no warnings can be given. 331dot (talk) 12:46, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks like you were close to setting a record: this query at Teahouse at 12:41 was the first-ever posting from this IP address, and short-blocked (31 hours) 25 minutes later. David notMD (talk) 03:00, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Minor edits?

Hi, am am new to Wikipedia. I edited Caprifoliaceae so that the phrase "the elderberries (Sambucus) and the viburnums Viburnum" became "the elderberries (Sambucus) and the viburnums (Viburnum)". I placed this as a minor edit.Where do I see my minor edits on a page?𝕋𝕙𝕖ℙ𝕝𝕒𝕟𝕖𝕥𝕒𝕣𝕚𝕒𝕟 (talk) 01:21, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi ThePlanetarian. Any changes you make to an article should be visible in the article itself or in the article's page's history to everyone once you click "Publish page". Minor edits will be marked with an "M". Just for reference, I can see the edit you made. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:34, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

At simple level, click on "View history: in top menu bar. Shows your entry. At that entry, on left, "Prev" will show side-by-side before and after of your edit. David notMD (talk) 03:10, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

How to determine if a subject is notable?

Hi all

I'm considering creating a new page about a Linux-based text editor "Notepadqq". It is similar, and inspired by the very popular Windows editor Notepad++. I don't want to go to the effort of creating a page if it is viewed as not-notable, so would like some feedback as to whether it would be considered notable. From my perspective, it is up-to-date, last commit 2 days ago, has an active community (last post today), and their blog has a comment of this month (September 2018). It has a wide use base according to https://snapcraft.io/notepadqq I have no connection to the development of it.

I have collected some reviews, etc, listed here:

Main web page: ----------

https://notepadqq.com/s/

https://github.com/notepadqq/notepadqq

Community --------------

https://plus.google.com/communities/118430810002505082315

Reviews: ----------------

http://www.linuxandubuntu.com/home/notepadqq-an-alternative-to-notepad-for-linux

https://opensource.com/article/17/12/editing-text-linux-desktop-notepadqq

https://itsfoss.com/notepadqq-notepad-for-linux/

https://medium.com/brian-besaw/notepadqq-my-search-for-a-linux-notepad-equivalent-has-ended-2b39704ab856

https://www.maketecheasier.com/notepadqq-notepad-alternative-linux/

https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/great-notepad-alternatives-linux/

https://news.softpedia.com/news/notepadqq-a-notepad-plus-plus-like-editor-for-linux-now-available-as-a-snap-on-ubuntu-520134.shtml

https://www.noobslab.com/2015/12/notepadqq-is-best-alternative-to.html

https://alternativeto.net/software/notepadqq/reviews/

https://www.2daygeek.com/install-notepadqq-source-code-editor-in-arch-linux-mint-ubuntu-debian-fedora/

Thank you for your feedback.

Peter peterl (talk) 01:43, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Peterl, I think reviews 1, 2, 3 and 5 put together can be considered significant coverage. I'd be interested in hearing opinions on this as well. — Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:16, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Person Information

I Don't understand what's My Wikipedia page, Isaac Morales. Not the baseball Player. just myself — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imorales914 (talk • contribs) 05:23, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Imorales914. I'm not exactlly sure what you mean by "My Wikipedia page", but perhaps you mean your user page. Each Wikipedia account has a user page and a user talk page. A user page is bascially where you can let the rest of the Wikipedia community know a little bit a more about yourself and your Wikipedia activities, while your user talk page is where other editors will post when they want discuss Wikipedia matters with you. It's important to understand that a user page is not like a Facebook account where you pretty much can post whatever you like; rather, you will be expected to adhere to relevant user page guidelines and other editors may edit your page in cases when you don't. For reference, your userpage is User:Imorales914

On the other hand, a page like Isaac Morales is a Wikipedia article and there's quite a bit of difference between an article and a user page; so, if you're question is about writing an article about yourself, then you probably should read Wikipedia:Autobiography because trying to do such a thing is highly discouraged. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)