User talk:PPelberg (WMF)/sandbox/teahouse

Latest comment: 3 years ago by 173.68.20.57 in topic this is a title
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Cappuccino edit

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

You're asking in the wrong place. This place is for asking about using Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 05:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
2 tablespoons of coffee, a pinch of salt, and fill the rest of the cup with birthday cake flavored coffee creamer. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 13:18, 16 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Ask at the Coffeehouse. EEng 15:03, 18 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Also, if the OP intends to use the preparation for stimulant purposes this could be interpreted as a request for medical advice. We better be careful. EEng 23:37, 18 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes, cappuccinos are a dangerous gateway drug. First it's all foam and cocoa powder, then someone introduces you to pumpkin spice and your life changes irreparably. Zindor (talk) 00:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Just to note, it's appreciated if you remain mature while at the tea-house. Signed,Benjamin Borg (Talk) 17:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes, my humour isn't everyone's cup of tea. Zindor (talk) 19:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I'm trying to decide whether he's serious. EEng 00:00, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I doubt it. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 13:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Benjamin Borg, were you serious? EEng 15:01, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Not sure, I just drank a few litres of capuccino Signed,Benjamin Borg (Talk) 15:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Ngutyana Sisipho, the Teahouse hates coffee; we only offer tea. GeraldWL 10:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Tool for finding links edit

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

@Muirton: If your page name is Foo bar, I would use Search to search for "Foo bar" -insource:"[[Foo bar" (See correction below), to find articles with that page name, but not if it's already linked. Some additional tweaking may be needed if it's too common a name and gets false hits. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@AlanM1: I've used search. I probably should have been more specific. A regular search takes you to the article page, and then you need to look through the page to find your search hit. I used a tool last year that takes you right to the word you searched for in the article when you click on the search result. I don't know where I got the tool. I was hoping for help in finding it again. Muirton (talk) 17:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Muirton: Once you're on the search results page, use the browser's "Find in this page" (usually Ctrl-F) to search for Foo bar. Then, middle-click (or left-click if you've configured your browser to open new links in new tabs/windows) on one of the entries in the search results to go to that page in a new tab. Do a "Find again" (usually with F3) to search for the Foo bar in that page. When you're done editing the page to add the link, close it to go back to the search results and repeat as needed. There may well be scripts that package this up neatly (maybe involving Chrome's extension to search from URL syntax with the #:~:text=Foo%20bar suffix), but this is how I do it "manually" with basic tools. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
This? Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Usedtobecool and Muirton: That tool includes pages that are already linked to the target, though, which the search does not. At least now that I've fixed it, that is  : [1] searches for "Foo bar" -insource:/\[\[\s*Foo bar/ —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@AlanM1 and Usedtobecool: These responses have been helpful. Thanks guys Muirton (talk) 00:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

How to create a company Page? edit

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

Ashumacs84, don't. Your company page will inevitably sound promotional, because you have a conflict-of-interest. The page will most likely get deleted. If you company is notable, another Wikipedian will create a page on it. Thanks, Giraffer munch 11:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hello Ashumacs84, please study WP:PAID and make necessary disclosures, then study WP:NORG and find reliable sources that meet the criteria. After evaluating the sources you have, if you believe your organisation still deserves an article, you can go through the WP:Article wizard which will guide you through the steps, at the end of which you will create a WP:DRAFT. When your draft is ready, you may submit it for review by WP:AFC reviewers who will either accept your draft or decline it with further guidance on how to do better. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:33, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Editing a Wikipedia edit

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

@Rpn21: - some pages have had significant amounts of problematic editing. This is usually vandalism or edit-warring. This can trigger varying levels of protection (semi-protect, the lowest, being the most common). These limit direct editing to those with a certain track record. For semi-protected pages you need to be autoconfirmed, which means having 10 edits and an article 4 days old.
Usually protection is temporary, but repeat instances can lead to indefinite/long-term protection.
You can still request edits on the article's talk page. In the meantime, around 95% of our articles are not protected. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:28, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Rpn21: the page Edit requests tells you how to make the requests that Nosebagbear mentions. --ColinFine (talk) 15:36, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

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

My submitted draft is now missing? edit

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

Hi Desmond123x. Are you referring to the draft discussed here. You can find it at Draft:Brit Bunkley. Another editor named AndreaSG50 removed the "AFC submission" template from the top of the draft's page with this edit, which is probably why it's no longer listed at Wikipedia:AfC sorting/Culture/Visual arts. Are you working together with this other editor in trying to create an article about Brit Bunkley? You and that account both have basically the same content in your user sandboxes (User:AndreaSG50/sandbox and User:Desmond123x/sandbox); so, maybe one of you can shed some light on what's going on here since it seem to be something more than just a coincidence. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:58, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes we are working on tis article together. She is fairly new and removed it by mistake. How do we get it back on as submission? Desmond123x (talk) 06:08, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Desmond123x and AndreaSG50: It sounds like you both know the artist and have started out by working just on this article together. So I have left advice on your talk pages as to how to declare any Conflict of Interest you may have before proceeding further. It's a simple thing, involving leaving an explanation on your userpage, if appropriate. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I live in the same city as the artist where he has exhibited. I am interested in his work and decided to write about it, with his friend who has access to many of the sources cited. I am not being paid. All sources are legitimate, easily verified and most are notable and speak for themselves. How is this a COI in a small city in a small nation? How do I put it back onto an "AFC submission"? Desmond123x (talk) 10:22, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes. Sorry Des! My apologies! I'm not sure how that happened. How do we get it back on to the "AFC submission"? AndreaSG50 (talk) 06:16, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I declared before and am declaring now (as I did on my userpage). I am a friend of Brit Bunkley. I was asked to help with the article with Desmond since I have access to a number of sources including books and catalogues. Desmond is a former art director from France who returned to New Zealand several years ago. He was supposed to submit the article, which he wrote (with my assistance for sources, which is why I kept a copy on my sandbox). So I am unclear how it was submitted in my name? where to from here? AndreaSG50 (talk) 22:56, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

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

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

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

That all sounds reasonable. Thank you. AndreaSG50 (talk) 04:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Sounds good to me, too. Desmond123x (talk) 05:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

More help edit

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


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

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

Hello, Helppublic. The draft in question is Draft:Nemilicheri, which I have wikilinked for the convenience of other editors. There are many assertions in your draft which are unreferenced. Every claim of importance or significance should be referenced to an independent reliable source. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Helppublic: one thing I would still wish for as a Wikipedia user is better information about the sources you do use. (I agree with Cullen that there should also be more sources, but this is about the ones that are already in the draft.) I posted some information about this on your user talk page a couple of days ago (here), and I saw that you thanked me for it (which was very nice of you :-) ). After that you did add more information about the titles of the various sources, and that's great, but there are still some things missing in how the sources are presented.
The first reference is (or was, because I have updated it a bit now) listed at the bottom as ""Census 2011/District Census Handbook/State Tamil Nadu/Part A ebook (CRC)/Thiruvallur/3301_PART_A_DCHB_THIRUVALLUR.pdf/Page 30 (ii) Census_Town/Nemilicheri (CT)". Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India. Retrieved 18 October 2020." You had added a lot of detail to the title, but the URL still led to www.censusindia.gov.in, which is the main page for the Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India. As a reader, if I click on the title of the reference I expect that I will find the exact source, in this case the District Census Handbook for Thiruvallur. That URL is https://censusindia.gov.in/2011census/dchb/DCHB_A/33/3301_PART_A_DCHB_THIRUVALLUR.pdf . Since that is a very long publication, you should also provide the page where this information (the population of Nemilicheri) can be found. After a bit of searching, I found it on page 42, so the parameter "page=42" should be added to the reference. I have also changed the title – it is tricky to know exactly what the title is and what is the "work" in this kind of publication, but I think "District Census Handbook, Thiruvallur, Village and town directory" is OK as a title. Somebody might come along and change it to something better, though. I hope all this makes sense! Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:12, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Pronouns in the bios of people of importance edit

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

Hello Zin373 and welcome to the Teahouse!
This should only be done when there is a reliable source (not, for example, the subject's facebook page)) that takes notice of the pronouns and reports on them.
Currently {{Infobox person}} does not have any support for this particular bit of information, but if there can be a callsign= parameter, there can't be much objection to adding a pronouns= parameter. But you'd have to raise this as a formal proposal, probably at Template talk:Infobox person before any action will be taken. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 06:58, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
That's an interesting suggestion. You could try raising it at the Village pump idea lab to get some more feedback. Adding pronouns to infoboxes project-wide would be a huge change, so there would likely be many considerations. You may also be interested in Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Identity. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 07:03, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata edit

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

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

Why were the changes undone? edit

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

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

Saving without publishing edit

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

I create new pages using Geany and save the result to my hard drive, now and again viewing what I've got in a Wikipedia "page" (?) that I give some silly throwaway name like "Alrgjsdjgsrgstjri", but am careful never to "publish" (save). (Indeed, there's one draft I've been tinkering with in this way since July or thereabouts.) When I'm happy with what I've got, and not before, I'll "publish" it with an appropriate title. -- Hoary (talk) 09:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Hoary:, are you saying that Geany supports the Wiki markup language, in the same way that it supports other languages such as C++ and HTML (with syntax highlighting, code completion, etc.)? If it does, that would be fantastically useful. If it doesn't, I wonder if any other text editor has that feature. Mike Marchmont (talk) 13:03, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Mike Marchmont, no, it certainly doesn't recognize it when it sees it, and there's no mention of Mediawiki in this splendid list. Perhaps it could be done (see this). I also make a lot of use of Geany for XHTML; and yes, it would be pleasant if Geany similarly closed Mediawiki's REF tags and so forth. Often I make a number of markup mistakes while using Geany, but it's easy to fix these within Wikipedia. My purpose here isn't to promote Geany in preference to other text editors (Notepad aside); it's just that Geany is one that does what it should, costs nothing, and runs on any major OS. -- Hoary (talk) 13:34, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your reply, @Hoary:. I didn't really expect Geany to support the Mediawiki language, but I thought it was worth asking. That said, I have now discovered the syntax highlighting feature in the native Wiki source editor. This makes it very much easier to read and review the text in the editor. I wish I had discovered it earlier.
Mike Marchmont (talk) 08:22, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Mike Marchmont, where does one enable this feature? (I don't see it in Preferences|Editing.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hoary, on the main toolbar in the Source Editor (that's the toolbar that has the Bold and Italic buttons) it's the eighth button from the left. It has a picture of a pencil on it. Syntax highlighting is toggled as soon as you click on it, and the setting is retained for subsequent edit sessions. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Ruthhenrietta: It really isn't that big of a deal if the page history is long. If you're concerned that you can't find a specific edit, use good edit summaries to help you find it.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 09:31, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Oh, and by the way, previewing does not save. It merely shows you what your changes look like.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 09:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks User:Hoary (I'll stick with Word!) & User:Ganbaruby (I won't worry) Ruthhenrietta (talk) 11:59, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Another tip. I edit articles in my Sandbox and preview them frequently. However, I virtually never save them there. Instead, I copy the (draft) text from the edit window into a text editor on my PC (I find MS Wordpad much better than MS Word, for example, because the latter will do stuff like turning two apostrophes — i.e. where italics are to be used — into " ). Later, when I return to continue building the article, I copy/paste the text from Wordpad back in to the edit box. Note that you need to check in your preferences for editing that the option "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary)" is checked. This makes it physically impossible for you to publish a part-edit, since you will leave the edit summary blank, on purpose, while building drafts. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Ruthhenrietta, Michael D. Turnbull's method and mine are very similar to each other. If you must use MS Word, then configure it so that it behaves like a text editor. But if you're going to do that, you might as well just use a text editor: excellent examples are (legally) free of charge. Simply, anything shown in Comparison of text editors as running on your OS (Windows, MacOS, Linux, whatever), open source, recently upgraded and free of charge should do the job. -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Review edit

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

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

Hey @Ganbaruby: thanks for your reply.

Eeeek - first timer questions! edit

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

Thank you - in anticipation of your help!

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

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

Wanted: Normal person to finish WP article edit

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Article looks to me like there was already an editor helping, and you appear to be in direct contact with that editor. Koncorde (talk) 10:56, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes but he no longer believes that I am acting in accord with WP:AGF. He has switched from “I have been watching developments over the time Mike Turnbull has been kindly helping to edit the Wikipedia article about me. I am not impressed by how Mike Turnbull has been treated, given that he stood up to the plate to help me and no other editor did.” to "so why do I always have to do something for people [Mike Turnbull] in return?" He fails to mention that the "something" I had asked him to discuss doing would be in the nature of a commission for which I would pay him. All that discussion had occurred off-wiki in e-mails between us that used the contact address for him that anyone can obtain from his website. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:55, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Courtesy link Ed Gold, articles are never finished Wikipedia is an ongoing project and we are all volunteers here, and insulting us won't help you get your own way. Theroadislong (talk) 12:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@EddieLeVisco: As you indicated in your last post here, we get that you didn't have the most pleasant experience here. That sucks. But honestly, you're not all that special. Articles here are written by people that want to write about the subject, and your rants aren't really helping your case here. We have a system to make sure our articles are as neutral and verifiable as we can. You don't own your article, and we don't care if you like it or not; as editors, our only priority is making a well written article, no matter how long it takes. You may make edit requests along with all the other articles and see if anyone feels like writing about you.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 12:54, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
You're looking for a "normal person", EddieLeVisco. When somebody writes something and SWITCHES TO FULL CAPITALS, I sense that they picture their readers as morons. I'm not so happy to be treated as a moron, but it doesn't much worry me: I have a thick skin. I tend to busy myself with articles about photographers who don't demand my attention, let alone insult me. But perhaps I'm abnormal. Given more time, I'd expand a lot of indisputably terrible "articles" (to stretch a definition) about indisputably outstanding photographers: Issei Suda is just one among dozens of these. -- Hoary (talk) 13:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
See also this person. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

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

can you semi-protect help? edit

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

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

How do I add a new section? edit

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

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

Fixing connected contributor issue edit

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

Can you be more specific? Which entry? Ruslik_Zero 14:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
If you are asking about Chloé Valdary, the article is not tagged. The Talk page mentions that User:Cvaldary is connected to the article, which appears to be true, she (assuming Cvaldary is Chloé Valdary) has made a few relatively modest edits in the past. You should advise her to not do so going forward, but I do not see a need to remove the Talk page mention, as it does not compromise the validity of the article. David notMD (talk) 16:23, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Question regarding tables edit

Hello,

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

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

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

editing a page edit

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

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

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

Obituaries edit

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

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

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

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

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

New entry edit

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

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

I suspect it involves this User:Steven irvine/sandbox, Wikipedia isn't a means to promote yourself I'm afraid. Theroadislong (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
In addition, Steven, you will be using up your time—for all of us a precious resource—on an endeavor that is likely one that cannot succeed. So I advise you to not go any further. The fact that your book series is not yet released and you are a "new author" are strong indicators that no article (one that can "stick", and will, not be deleted) is possible. This is because we only properly have articles on subjects that have been the subject of significant coverage (think at least a few paragraphs dedicated to the proposed topic), in reliable sources, that are entirely independent of you and/or the book series (for example, third-party articles about you or the series published in professional magazines). Please read generally Wikipedia:Notability, and specifically (as the case may be), Wikipedia:Notability (books) or WP:AUTHOR. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:10, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

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

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

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. It might have helped had you given an example of what you were thinking about, but I would say that you should avoid repeating any information, except to point out that key elements of significance can be placed (uncited if you wish) within the lead, and then expanded upon further down in the article. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. Avoid using phrases like '(see below)' and content can change and be moved about, and such instructions become irrelevant. You use the word 'discussion', but I'm hoping that was just a clumsy choice of words as articles should be neutral, encyclopaedic and not discussive, though it can cite different reliable sources to show that one story sometimes has more than one side to it. I assume your concern relates to Julia Ioffe. I've not looked at it in detail, but keeping content succinct and relevant is a good aspiration. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
This originated from my question at Talk:Julia_Ioffe#Deferring_tweet_controversy_from_Politico_section. The article on Ioffe is currently structured with two sections that mention her viral tweet and consequent firing. The structure may be in need of change. But in its current form, the tweet episode is mentioned twice, and it's easier to get the nuances right in the longer section and put a "see below" in the shorter one. Hence the question. 73.89.25.252 (talk) 06:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

New editor edit

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

Hello, Tanks400, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have joined! You have created an account, and edited on this page, so you are a Wikipedia editor. I see you have already made some edits, which have been reverted. The problem is that you are making the standard beginner's mistake (I remember making it myself) of adding what you know to an article. Wikipedia isn't interested in what you know, or what I know, or what any random person on the internet knows, because there is no way for a reader to check that it is accurate. What you need to do, if you want to add some inforamtion to an article, is to find a published source (preferably one independent of the subject of the article) and cite that source (see referencing for beginners). It is the citations which give Wikipedia value.
I suggest you look at Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure to learn more about how you can help us build an encyclopaedia. --ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Userbox edit

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

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

Changes to the Helen Keller page edit

Hi there!

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

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

Can somebody please help me with this?

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

Hi Helen/BlindAdvocacy1! Glad to see people who are trying to correct errors. What I would suggest is going to the talk page for Helen Keller's article and request the edits you want fixed. Be sure to back up your requests with reliable sources that we can verify. I will caution, though, that the aim of Wikipedia is not to right great wrongs or advocate for one issue or another, so as we are improving Helen's article, we may have to be careful not to be overly promotional, you know what I mean? Bkissin (talk) 20:45, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Given your position, you should also declare that you are in effect a paid editor. See WP:PAID You should declare this on your User page (pretty much the wording you have above, or else there is a template to use). Also, being Paid is why Bkissin directed you to proposing changes on the article's Talk page rather than editing the article directly. The follow-up will be that an editor not connected to HK or AFB will either make the requested changes, or not. Be patient. David notMD (talk) 21:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
BlindAdcocacy1 Also, review what is already on the Talk page, including the two archives of older discussions. Could be that what you want to change has already been discussed and decided against. David notMD (talk) 21:27, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Pictures edit

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

Wikipedia:Images should answer most of your questions. Please be sure to respect copyrights. See WP:Copyright policy for details. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Bunnyrabbitbunny: If your question relates to Draft:Toyota Camatte Petta, there is insufficient content and only one reference which is not to merit being a separate article. To avoid disappintment, you would be better off not making lots of really short, basic draft articles about individual models, but adding content to relevant pages about the series, such as Toyota concept vehicles (2010–2019). At present, that draft stands no chance of being moved to mainspace, and some of your other drafts seem equally flimsy. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:20, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

userboxes edit

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

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

Hi there Antrotherkus, you might find what you are looking for in Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Policies#Civility. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 19:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
 This user tries to do the right thing. If they make a mistake, please let them know.
{{user oops}}. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply


Writing an article for an artist edit

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

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

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

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

Welcome to the Teahouse, Xuexiujia. That's a good question. Providing you're not so close to the subject that you "can't see the wood for the trees", you'll 'know' its nearly ready when it is easy to read, sounds like a short, succinct encyclopaedia entry about an interesting person, and everything within it is Verifiable by reference to reliable sources, and if it looks and reads like other similar articles on professors. Right now, User:Xuexiujia/sandbox, it's lacking a lead paragraph to summarise why this person is notable, and your own first paragraph is an incomprehensible list of apparently random words (job titles?) that might mean something to the subject, but certainly isn't written in flowing English. Much of the other bits look extremely promotional, as if the person themself has written it, and doesn't want to miss a single thing out. I often tell people that "less is more" on Wikipedia. It's far better to be short and succinct about a person, and cut out the stuff that looks like bullet points from their LinkedIn page or CV. A good article should be a pleasure to read - I'm afraid this it hasn't yet reached that point - but keep at it! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Xuexiujia: if this is about User:Xuexiujia/sandbox, it's a long way off ready. The first sentence is very long and unreadable, I don't think it has a verb in it, so I was put off trying to read further. There's a lot of unwarranted boldface further down the page. But both those are easily put right. Unfortunately there's another problem that may be harder to address. A Wikipedia article should be based on what has been written about its subject in reliable independent published sources; and those sources should be cited in the article. Your sandbox cites no sources at all. Maproom (talk) 21:20, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I cut a lot that has no place in an article. To confirm his notability, references must be to published stuff ABOUT him (not by him). And a standard Wikipedia question - what is your relation to the person? Employee? Relative? Friend? Coworker? Student? David notMD (talk) 21:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Please note that certain revisions of the draft have now been deleted in light of copyright concerns.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:05, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Draft of article not reviewed for many weeks edit

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

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

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

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

  Courtesy link: Talk:Hunter_Biden @Michael-Ridgway: What makes you think you are blocked from the talk page? You just posted there not long ago and got a reply that you are posting old information. Additionally, you should not use the New York Post as a source. According to WP:RSN "There is consensus that the New York Post is generally unreliable. A tabloid newspaper, editors criticise its lack of concern for fact-checking or corrections, including a number of examples of outright fabrication." RudolfRed (talk) 00:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Nothing, I guess, other than the fact that the edit link to the page was gone making it impossible for me to post anything on the page from that point forward. Michael-Ridgway (talk) 00:52, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Question edit

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

@BigRed606: Depends on what kind of "hot topic" you're talking about. Do you have a specific article in mind?  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 03:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I think Template:Controversial is what you're looking for. It should be placed on the article's talk page rather than the article itself, however. -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Question about images edit

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

Hi Freshclover, it looks to me that you forgot include the .jpg file extension. —teb728 t c 04:34, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
i.e. you wrote [[پرونده:Mina Dastgheib-youth|بندانگشتی]] it should be [[پرونده:Mina Dastgheib-youth.jpg|بندانگشتی]] —teb728 t c 05:01, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hi again, Thanks Teb for the quick and correct answer to my question about uploading images. My second question is I have two pictures and Wikipedia is putting them on top of each other. How can I place them side-by-side to save space? Can I change the size? Freshclover (talk) 07:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Freshclover, I can't read Persian; does fa:ویکی‌پدیا:ساختار درج پرونده answer your question? —teb728 t c 07:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC) The English version is Wikipedia:Extended image syntax. —teb728 t c 07:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Commons photo licensing question edit

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

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

At the very bottom of each of those pages is a link to https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. That license does not allow for commercial re-use of the material, so it's not acceptable for use on Wikipedia. Rojomoke (talk) 05:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
(edit conflict) Hi Greshthegreat. Unless you took the photos yourself or the photographer who did has given their WP:CONSENT, Commons will unlikely be able to keep the photos you've uploaded per c:COM:OTRS. See c:Commons:Licensing and c:Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Vehicles for more specifc information, but generally the shapes, etc. of a car isn't likely going to be considered eligible for copyright protection; the photo of a car, however, is a different story and the copyright holder of the a photo is generally considered to be held by the person who takes it. Commons only accepts content which is 100% free so to speak; it doesn't accept any fair use content per c:COM:FAIR and publicity photos provided by GMC are going to be considered protected by copyright unless it explicity says some place that they're not. If you scroll down to the very bottom of the original sources you've given for each photo, you'll see " Creative Commons©" in tiny print, and clicking on that link lead to this page. Non-commercial licenses are not accepted by Commons or Wikipedia which means that the content from such pages should be uploaded to Commons unless you can show it has been specifically released under another acceptable license.
Finally, Commons and Wikipedia are technically separate project with their own policies and guidelines. If you'd like a more definitive answer from the Commons community, you can try asking about this at c:COM:VPC. Here at the Teahouse, we can give our opinion on what might be the case when it comes to Commons images, but we can really resolve any issues with Commons images here on Wikipedia; they'll need to be resolved on Commons and the files you uploaded are likely going to be tagged for speedy deletion by a bot or a Commons editor fairly soon if they remain without a valid and acceptable copyright license. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

How to create a wiki page edit

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

Hi Amitmisra21. What do you mean by my wiki page? Do you want to create a Wikipedia article about something or do you want to create a user page? There are different policies and guidelines applicable to each so if you can clarify what type of page you're referring to, a Teahouse host can probably give you a more specific answer. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Amitmisra21, if your goal is to write an acceptable encyclopedia article, then you should read and study Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:23, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hi Amitmisra21. If you are asking about your autobiography at Draft:Amit Misra, users are discouraged from writing autobiographies. —teb728 t c 05:35, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Creating a new article edit

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

Assassin7177, I guess this is about Draft:Karikku? It's about a Youtube Channel, but it uses "Infobox YouTube personality", which is intended for use in articles about Youtube personalities. Maybe that's the cause of your problem. Maproom (talk) 06:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I have created a new article on a Youtube channel but have used a Youtube personality infobox. Can you tell me how to edit it and which one should i use as i have already submitted the draft for reviewing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assassin7177 (talkcontribs) 06:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Assassin7177: Template:Infobox YouTube personality is the correct infobox that you should be using for a Youtube channel, no matter if it's one or multiple people running the channel. Refer to the page linked to see all available parameters.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 07:33, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

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

Please review my edit request edit

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

Please be patient. This is not an urgent issue, and it is a slightly complex post to respond to. (I can say immediately that you will not get a consensus to make those edits yourself.) You do not need an administrator to respond, by the way. --bonadea contributions talk 06:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I've just responded.  Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 07:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

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

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

Help with submitting an article edit

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

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

Here is the article so far:

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

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

Hello Yairhay, and welcome to the Teahouse! Your article was declined because it didn't satisfy our notability guidelines for companies (see this and this).
Everything on Wikipedia needs to be cited to a reliable source, and the majority of them should be secondary. They (the sources) also need to go into detail about the subject of your article, not just mention them. None of your sources do this. If there are no more reliable, independent (secondary) sources that cover your subject, then your topic may not be suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. If there are, then add them!
Regarding your COI, place {{UserboxCOI|1=Draft:CGI Group}} on your userpage and that should be sufficient. Giraffer munch 08:40, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply


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

Subscription fee for Wikipedia edit

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

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

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

TheSaver99 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a free to access encyclopedia of human knowledge, created for the benefit of humanity. There is no fee to access or participate here. The computers Wikipedia is on are operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization that accepts donations from people around the world to fund its operations so that access fees are not required. The vast majority of editors are here to contribute to this project because they believe in its mission or otherwise want to help out.
Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources state about subjects. Any addition beyond fixing spelling or grammar needs to have a citation to a reliable source, preferably one independent of the subject. Only what the sources says should be summarized, without conclusions being drawn.
Since you are asking about corporate edits, I assume that you represent a corporation. Corporate representatives need to review the conflict of interest and paid editing policies, for information on formal declarations they need to make. They should avoid making edits directly, but may make formal edit requests on article talk pages, or use Articles for Creation to draft articles for others to review. Often, corporate representatives find it difficult to participate here, because our goals are fundamentally different. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hello, TheSaver99. It's not entirely clear, but I get the impression that you are under the (common) misapprehension that Wikipedia is for people or companies to tell the world about themselves. It is not. An article (whether about a person, a company, a place, a school, a band, a book, a theory, or anything else) should be based almost entirely on what people unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish about it. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject, or people closely associated with the subject, say or want to say about it. Such people (we refer to them as editors with a conflict of interest) are welcome to suggest changes to the article, using the edit request mechanism, but should not change the article directly, and their requests may or may not be carried out, depending on the judgment of uninvolved editors. --ColinFine (talk) 10:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
TheSaver99 If you are an employee of Laurus Labs you must comply with paid editing policies. This includes declaring such on your User page and not making any direct edits to the article. David notMD (talk) 13:24, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Draft + Question edit

Hello There,

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

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

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

Dear Wiki Foundation or team,

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

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

Hello again, TheSaver99. Have you looked at Dravida Nadu? - I realise this is not the same thing as you are talking about, but the "Background" section and the navigation box at the right may have links that are useful. Perhaps WP:WikiProject India would also be a good place to look. --ColinFine (talk) 10:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes, a WikiProject is definitely the way to go for something like this. Wikipedia:WikiProject Dravidian civilizations seems like it might be just what you're looking for. It doesn't seem very active, but it's easier than starting from scratch at least. -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Unable to edit software version edit

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

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

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

A question edit

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

Welcome to the Teahouse, Chicdat. Sorry you've had to wait so long for a reply. Your problem is that you've actually set a ridiculously short time period (7 days) before the bot comes along and archives everything within it. That's far too soon to be sensible for a low-traffic talk page like yours. It's your choice, but I'd change it to 60 days or more, and increase the max size of your archive from 50k to something that won't (in due course) result in you having myriads of little archives to wade through. I prefer one easy-to-view talk page going back a reasonable length of time, so my own settings are to archive old posts after 90 days, and to have archives of 100k. See User:MiszaBot/config for changing your settings. See also this instruction within that page for retaining a specific thread indefinitely, or for some predetermined length of time. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Sure! 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me! 10:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Translation of an Art-term edit

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

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

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

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

I think it's Tessellation, Gyanda. --ColinFine (talk) 13:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thank you very much, ColinFine, i also translated it as tiling. And your link is exactly what i was searching for. Thanks again! --Gyanda (talk) 14:43, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
This seems correct. I just couldn't find the English counterpart. Why is it you were on the German article, anyways? Le Panini (Talk tome?) 13:22, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I added info to a German wikipedia-article of mine, which is also in the English wikipedia, and i hesitated to update the article here, because i just couldn't figure out the English equivalence. Now i can start to add the info here as well. Thanks! --Gyanda (talk) 14:43, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Request AfD / WP:SIGCOV advice edit

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

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

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

The online sources in the article are few, and they aren't highly cited in the article. Citation 4 supports a single sentence, and is thus used, similarly Citation 5 supports the fact that a notable scholar was his student, and is thus used.
Coming to the major sources of this article,al-Ilām bi man fī Tārīkh al-Hind min al-Ālām al-musamma bi Nuzhat al-Khawātir wa Bahjat al-Masāmi wa an-Nawāzir by Abdul Hai Hasani has significant details about the subject, similarly Tārīkh Darul Uloom Deoband has significant details about the subject. The monthly journal citation, although significant, but is improperly cited, has significant coverage about the subject. The information in the Nuzhat al-Khawātir, a widely known book, has enough information about the subject. We do not just see online available sources. Your statement the one sentence mentions of the subject in the cited documents are passing mentions is completely wrong about the offline sources. I remember reading about this scholar, in a journal published in Delhi, but sadly I do not have access to that right now. The sources in this article completely demonstrate notability, if not GNG, then the SNG.─ The Aafī (talk) 13:41, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thank you, TheAafi but I am not seeking to further discuss the issue here - you are already participating in the deletion discussion, and I hope you will continue to do so there. In this particular forum, I am seeking the advice of Teahouse hosts on WP:SIGCOV. Thank you. — Ad Meliora TalkContribs 14:20, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Ad Meliora: I'm not a Teahouse house (came here semi-randomly) but also not a participant in the AFD. While you're right that we shouldn't relitigate the AFD heer, The Aafi's comments seems to get to the heart of the issue, and is likely partly why you may be confused. You said "I feel that the one sentence mentions of the subject in the cited documents are passing mentions, and don't rise to the level of significant coverage" but The Aafi suggests several sources have way more than a single sentence. It's possible these sources aren't currently used in the article, but demonstrating WP:NOTABILITY only really requires evidence that they exist not that they are used in the article. In other words, while you may be right that a small number of single sentence mentions will not be enough to demonstrate significant coverage, more substantial coverage may be. E.g. I read a whole page for one source which while in some ways not much in a long book etc, is still way more than a single sentence. Remember also that reliable sources don't have to be online nor do they have to be in English. They don't even have to be particularly recent although very old sources may not be reliable, given the standards of scholarship, human knowledge at the time, etc. And we quite welcome articles about subjects only well known in some small predominantly non English speaking region, provided that the reliable source coverage is present. (And as said before, even if that coverage is in obscure non English publications provided of course that said publications are reliable.) Nil Einne (talk) 03:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Problem when adding URL to an Article edit

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

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

I get the following warning

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

What is the problem? Can I use the URL?


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

@BFP1: The problem was that the Commons category name in the {{Commons category-inline}} template—John James Wilson (marine painter)—did not match the Commons category name in the Wikidata item for the painter—John James Wilson (artist). I've made this edit so that the warning will no longer appear to anyone previewing changes to the article. (The underlying problem is that Commons appears to have two different categories for the same artist. I'll see if I can get that resolved.) Deor (talk) 18:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks @Deor: for making sense of the puzzle and hopefully providing a remedy.BFP1 (talk) 21:13, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Green Times New Roman text used on talk pags edit

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

Hello and welcome to the teahouse! If you see a different text/format on talk pages, most probably it's a template. If you want further clarification, you might want to link this talkpage(s) next time. Signed,Benjamin Borg (Talk) 15:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
One place I saw such text was at [[2]], although I have also seen it in other places. Beaneater (talk) 15:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
It's {{tq|<text>}}. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:11, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Beaneater00, to answer your question, it indicates a direct quote. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:14, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Beaneater00: It depends on the page. If it's a help or other documentation page (not an article), we have templates that are used to color "good" examples green ({{xt}}) and "bad" examples red ({{!xt}}) (e.g., the table at MOS:BADDATE). Is that what you mean? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:59, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I believe that is what I had seen. Thank you. Beaneater (talk) 02:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

OSS project edit

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

Click this hyperlink Wikipedia:YFA. It will give you a template on how to create an article, and the core principles. Good luck! Le Panini (Talk tome?) 16:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hello, Sasa krsmanovic, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would add to what Le Panini has said that I would advise not even thinking about the format of the article until you have looked for and found the independent reliably published sources that are absolutely required. I appreciate you don't want to spend more time than you need to, but if you do not start by finding the sources to establish that the project meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then there is a chance that any work you put into it will be wasted anyway. --ColinFine (talk) 20:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Have I submitted my article for review correctly? edit

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

I've submitted it for you. For reference, put {{subst:submit}} at the top of the article to submit it. Happy editing! Le Panini (Talk tome?) 16:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks User:Le Panini - it's a bit weird there are no instructions to say you have to do that... and that the big blue button doesn't do it! For a newbie like me, that's really confusing... Ruthhenrietta (talk) 08:42, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Wikipedia is hard to pick up at first, but don't let that scare you. "Publish changes" just publishes the recent changes, it doesn't bring the article to the main article sections. When you're ready for it, that's when you'd put {{subst:submit}} for initial review, and if the article meets the criteria, it will move from the draftspace to the mainspace. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 10:37, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Drone Racing League Comment edit

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

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

The person who did this also only has one edit.


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

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

How do I change nickname colors? edit

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

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

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

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

Source edit

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

Lima Bean Farmer, WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard may be of user to you. Regards, Giraffer munch 17:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Lima Bean Farmer: I think, straight off, that's not a reliable source. Hardly worth bothering the folks over at WP:RSN. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Nick Moyes, well at least they can take a look at it and have precedent. Thank you for checking! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:06, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Lima Bean Farmer: It's a one-man band, blog-cum-homemade website. I'm pretty darned sure nobody is going to accept that. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia Pages edit

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

You never submitted the page for review, and even if you did it would be summarily declined. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 17:46, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Courtesy link User:Jkeller70/sandbox TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 17:53, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
AND, the same information is on your User page. Please delete all of it. A User page is for a description of your intentions and experiences as a Wikipedia editor. David notMD (talk) 18:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Declinable, by the way, because no references. From what is in the draft now, no expectation that it can meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. David notMD (talk) 18:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

idk edit

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

@Idontevenknowatall: Here's a great place to start. Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 17:51, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Welcome to the Teahouse, Idontevenknowatall. And once you've collected all 15 badges from completing The Wikipedia Adventure, there are lots of ideas in the 'Help Out' section at Wikipedia:Community portal. The key thing to remember is never to add anything to a Wikipedia article just becaue you happen to know it "for a fact". Instead, find good quality, reliable references that allow anyone else to "verify that fact". A good motto is: "If in doubt, leave it out!" Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:09, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

How can you find your own Sandbox? edit

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

Can you help me find Hurricanestudier123: Sandbox?

If you are using the desktop version, there is a link to "Sandbox" at the top of your browser window. If it's red, then you haven't created it, just click on it to edit it. Another way to get to it is by clicking on Special:MyPage/Sandbox or typing that in the search Wikipedia box on any Wikipedia page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:52, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
(edit conflict) I just created it, at User:Hurricanestudier123/sandbox as expected. Maproom (talk) 18:54, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

List of big bands edit

This alpha listing looks fairly complete, but should it also include Louis Prima and his orchestraBobhope2000 (talk) 19:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

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

Need help - IJR edit

Hello,

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

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

Label question edit

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

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

Question edit

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

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

Edit Restrictions edit

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

@Palpatine84: No, as long as they are properly done. There is a character limit to edit summaries, but it's quite long. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Palpatine84: There is no limit, but often a series of small edits may be better than one large edit. If another editor does not agree with your edit, they can revert it. If you do several small edits, then only one of those might be reverted. But with a large edit the whole thing would be reverted.RudolfRed (talk) 21:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Palpatine84: there is also an issue that after too long with the edit screen open, Wikipedia starts having a risk of timing out. You only have to lose a very long edit once to decide to save more frequently in the future Nosebagbear (talk) 22:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Palpatine84: There are some technical limits on article size, so I guess technically if an article is 10 bytes less than the limit and you add a paragraph, you will cause problems. These limits are rarely encountered, but if you want to test them, please do it in your personal sandbox at Special:MyPage/Sandbox, not in the main encyclopedia. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hi Palpatine84. Although there don't seem to be any hard fast limits in places, I think, as the others above have pointed out, you have to use a little common sense and self-assess how the edit affects the article over all. If you try to rewrite an entire article (which is already fairly well-developed) in a single edit, there is a good chance that the changes you make are going to be too much for other editors to figure out at once. So, it might be better to break things up into smaller edits or even be WP:CAUTIOUS instead to give others a chance to look things over and ofter some feedback. At the same time, there's no need to make lots edits to fix the same obvious spelling or grammar errors in a article, if you can do them all at once. You have to sort of find a balance, and they way you do that is simply by editing more and seeing how people respond. You're not going to please everyone. Some people find editors who make lots of little minor edits consecutively to the same article within a few minutes of each other a bit annoying, especially if everything could've been done in one edit; others, other the hand, like smaller, easier to understand edits because it makes things easier to follow and cleanup if needed without have to revert lots of other content which might be a problem. You're probably going to be OK as long as you don't give others the impression that you're trying to boost your edit count for some reason by making lots of small edits for just the sake of making an edit. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Question regarding page previews and entries edit

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

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

Draft article edit

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

Not only can you let them, but you can't really stop them, assuming they don't break any normal Wikipedia rules. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:12, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hi Cwater1. Wikipedia pages aren't really WP:OWNed by their creators; so, as davidwr points out, anyone can techinically edit the draft you're working on. However, more experienced editors will often refrain from editing drafts out of deference to their creators unless they feel there's an obvious policy or guideline issue that needs addressing asap or there some things which can be cleaned up without being too obtrusive. Experienced editors seem to generally avoid trying to "take over" a draft because doing so can sometimes create bad will among editors. Even though the goal of all involved should be to create the best article possible for Wikipedia, people are people and editors can sometimes get a bit possessive and protective of their work. New editors, in particular, who are not quite yet used to how things are done on Wikipedia often take quite personally when they log in to find their previous efforts completely re-written or outright removed by other editors. Since drafts aren't really articles yet, creators tend to given a little more leeway to make mistakes and more of an opportunity to fix these mistakes themselves. Anyway, if you're working on a draft and find yourself stuck, you can feel free to ask others to help. In fact, that most likely is a better approach than simply waiting around an hoping someone shows up on their own to pitch in. Try asking for feedback at a WikiProject which might cover the subject area; in this case, that would probably be Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
People can come in and edit if they so choose to. Keep note, though, that everyone (most people) has the goal to make articles better, even if it goes against your intentions or viewpoint. Le Panini (Talk tome?) 00:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
From past observations, asking at Teahouse for other editors to look at a draft sometimes results in the draft getting a lot shorter. Can be unsettling to the person who asked for a look. David notMD (talk) 07:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hello Teahouse edit

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

note to others: this is referring primarily to the article Angelique Fawcette
Hi TryMe99 - I'm sorry this experience has been your introduction to Wikipedia. Navigating the various policies and guidelines here is complex enough for a new user as it is, and when you choose to write an article about a living person that you have a close real-life connection to, even more complex policies come into play (WP:BLP and WP:COI, respectively). This is why writing such articles as a new user is strongly discouraged. So I can definitely understand why you feel like you're being personally attacked and/or treated unfairly here. That being said, I can assure you that nothing going on here is actually unusual, just confusing, and you're certainly not being targeted due to your race or gender. And assuming good faith on the part of other editors is a core tenet of how people are expected to behave here, so the fact that you're making such accusations is certainly a part of why things haven't been going smoothly for you.
To address some of your specific points:
  • You owning the copyright on a photo is not in and of itself enough for it to be ok to be used here. You first have to officially release it under a license that removes all copyright and licensing restrictions, even allowing commercial use. If you are willing to do that, follow the instructions here, being careful not to neglect the "Licensing your file" part. See here for more info on licensing and acceptable licenses for Wikipedia. And if the photo in question is this one, then it seems that Getty Images owns the copyright and not you, which would certainly be an issue.
  • I think the removal of the Nichelle Nichols information was in part a mistake by that editor, but I can see why it happened. First of all, the source provided doesn't actually support the claim it was directly attached to, that "Fawcette garnered support from Kerri Kasem and her Elder Abuse Foundation Kasem Cares." That information appears nowhere in the article. An additional problem with that source is that much of it consists of Fox News simply repeating claims made by Fawcette herself. For the purposes of Wikipedia at least, that means that the claims simply come from Fawcette herself rather than from Fox News's reporting - i.e. that article would not qualify as a reliable source that verifies those claims. We are especially vigilant about such things when it comes to information that might be seen as defamatory toward a living person (in this case, Nichols's son) - see Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident if you're curious why. BUT, the paragraph that begins with "According to August 2018 court documents obtained by People magazine, Fawcette objected to Johnson’s petition to be named Nichols’ conservator" does NOT rely on statements Fawcette made herself, so the fact that Fawcette was involved in that case (though not the part about her and Nichols being "friends") IS well supported by that article. I'll bring it up on the article's talk page, and re-add it if there is consensus to do so.
  • It is quite usual, and in fact desirable, that pages you create will be regularly edited by others. See WP:OWN. This is all the more true for new articles that have clear issues with certain Wikipedia guidelines, as yours did.
Hopefully that helps to clear some things up. Things aren't usually quite THIS confusing here, but you have to understand that by creating an article about a living person you're close to as your very first act on Wikipedia, you've done the equivalent of diving straight into the deep end without learning to swim first. I would suggest taking a step back from this particular issue until you have a stronger grasp of core Wikipedia principles - The Wikipedia Adventure is a great starting point. I think you'll find that we're not so bad after all. Feel free to respond with any follow-up questions! -Elmer Clark (talk) 06:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hello Elmer Clark Thank you so much for your reply and for taking the time to write all of this, to explain the situation and for including the links. I sincerely appreciate it. It has been a 4-Day rocky Journey. Just a note, I did 'not' create a Wikipedia page for myself or my film, these pages went up I observed after we obtained Distribution for our film and after we had the actual real virtual premiere (due to Covid) with Snoop Dogg leading the film on August 1, 2020 versus the non-public Sneak-Peak premiere in 2016 at the Mann's Chinese Theater - 50th Anniversary Day of Star Trek. Otherwise, yes, by you sharing all of this I do believe there are a group of kind people here as you are providing me with facts and direction and yes, when we are new, sigh, it is challenging and given all of the turmoil that we (I) as Black people have to go through just to live and exist I was truly concerned that this was an issue as well. Thank you and the other Wiki-Editor who referred me here for explaining to me otherwise. And yes, I will take your advice and step back in hopes that the facts will go up accurately. Thank you for making the other correction that you mentioned I appreciate that as well. On the outside world, outside of Wikipedia, we all take Wikipedia as "the real truth", it is not social media, but rather we can come here for accuracy and thus can make decisions, business, personal or simply educational decisions off of what we read here. Don't know what more to say but thank you, I will step back and just read the guidelines when I can, in between work and time. Thanks so much again and have an enjoyable day. TryMe99 (talk) 07:11, 22 October 2020 (UTC)TryMe99Reply

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

Ryan Avery (speaker) edit

Hi Everyone,

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

Your list of contributions shows next to nothing that's independent of one Ryan Avery or another. So first, familiarize yourself with Wikipedia by improving other articles. Once you've done this, ensure that your Avery is notable by Wikipedia's criteria. (See Wikipedia:Notability (people).) If he is, then read and digest WP:YFA. If that sounds OK, ask RHaworth (who deleted it) to restore Draft:Ryan Avery (speaker). (You may need to say more than that you want to restart work on it. In your request, provide clear evidence for notability.) If you get it, start editing it by cutting out the junk and adding clear evidence of notability. Then improve it as a whole. When you think it's ready, propose its promotion from draft to article. -- Hoary (talk) 04:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thank you so much Hoary.. I'll try your suggestion of asking the one who deleted it to restore draft for Ryan Avery. And you are correct. I should read more and get familiarize with Wikipedia.. Azumi121 (talk)
@Azumi121: It looks like you have repeatedly changed the existing article about the lacrosse player to remove content about that person and add content about the speaker. That is never appropriate (and you have received a lot of information and a couple of warnings about that on your user talk page, as well as here). Your comment above, I've read that Wikipedia favors more on notable people looks as if you are still thinking that the other article should be removed in favour of the person you think is more notable, but that is not correct. Ignore the article about the lacrosse player (who is definitely notable), don't move it to another title and don't change its content. If the speaker is in fact notable, there can be an article about him in addition to the one about the lacrosse player. --bonadea contributions talk 06:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your feedback bonadea. I appreciate it. It's true I made a couple of revisions and it's really because I haven't done my research and was trying only what I think I should do at that time. That's why I am asking here now on how to do it properly. I'll try to improve other articles first and request removal of deletion of Avery's draft so I can work on it again. Thank you again for the contribution. Azumi121 (talk) 12:18, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Help me improve my article edit

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

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

Requesting volunteering in clean up support edit

Hi,

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

Can some one volunteer for article clean up?

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

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

General Question edit

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

Sneh Upadhya Draft edit

Hi,

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

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

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

Hello edit

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

Hi SacredForest. You can find out some more general information on how to upload and use photo or other images in articles at Wikipedia:Image use policy, but basically there are two aspects that need to be resolved. The first aspect is the licensing of the file you want to upload and the second aspect is how you intend to use the file.
The first aspect is important because Wikipedia only accepts photos, etc. which meet its licensing requirements regardless of how you intend to use it. Anything considered to be a copyright violation or otherwise not in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines related to images is likely not going to be allowed.
The second aspect is important because images should be contextually relevant to the articles they're added to and should actually improve (or at least not detract from) the reader's understanding of the article. Sometimes this is not always so clear and editors might not agree on whether adding a particular image is an improvement; in such cases, it often takes a WP:CONSENSUS established via article talk page discussion to resolve things, regardless of the image's licensing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Warn him edit

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

Satyitihas has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of User:Ultimate survi. David notMD (talk) 08:33, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
As has the OP as well.... Joseph2302 (talk) 10:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Create Page For My Brand/Company edit

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

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

Azyhk cave edit

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

Hi Blaxoul, questions like this belong on the talk page of the article. If you get little response, post a link at the talk pages of the relevant WikiProjects. Is there anything I can help you with regarding editing Wikipedia? Zindor (talk) 12:38, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Blaxoul: In questions regarding territorial claims, Wikipedia generally goes what the international community and the UN say, which means that your point did have merit. That article sees a lot of edit warring from anonymous or newly registered editors who try to change it to reflect their own nationalist point of view (not a single point of view – both sides contribute to this!) However, even though the edit you made to Azokh Cave removed some inappropriate phrasing, it also removed a lot more including most of the infobox, and so it did not look constructive on the face of it, as the editor who reverted you also said. I have restored an earlier, stable version of the article which I believe represents the view held by most of the international community. I also want to thank you for not simply reverting back to your preferred version, and instead coming here to ask about it – as Zindor points out, the talk page of the article would also have been a good place to put your comments, and in general it is better to keep specific content questions to article talk pages. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:09, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Bonadea thanks for following up on this. I had to get back to work off-wiki. There's the start of a discussion on my talk page, but it's nothing pressing yet. Zindor (talk) 13:47, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Clarification on a BLP article edit

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

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

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

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

Mojo0306, yes, the draft has 34 citations. But I've checked the first six, and none of them help to establish that the subject is notable. If there are references among those 34 which do establish that she's notable, you could make them easier for a reviewer to find by removing most or all of the others. Maproom (talk) 12:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Mojo0306 I'm afraid very few proposed articles on "YouTube personalities" succeed in establishing their notability. I suggest you read WP:NYOUTUBE for guidance.--Shantavira|feed me 14:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Help me improve my article edit

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

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

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

this is a title edit

This is a description. I can format it. 173.68.20.57 (talk) 15:13, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply