Wikipedia:Teahouse

  (Redirected from Wikipedia:TEAHOUSE)
Skip to top
Skip to bottom


Vivo (technology company) (2 questions)Edit

I had just recently come across the aforementioned article and I have two issues:

  • Half the page length is a table listing all the smartphones made by this company. Many smartphone entries are unsourced in the list. Should every single smartphone be listed or only the ones for which existence can be verified or only the ones which have their own article?
  • I edited the article to do the following:
    • Remove unsourced information about the company name that was present in the article for more than a year
    • Remove other unsourced information which I couldn't verify
    • Rephrase a sentence
I promptly got a Level 3 warning from one Seemplez, which I think is either assuming bad faith or being too strict. Is my edit really bad?

45.251.33.71 (talk) 09:59, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP user, I believe that your edit is correct. As per WP:VERIFY, "Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed", which is exactly what you did. I have reverted the revert (i.e. gone back to edits you made). Joseph2302 (talk) 12:18, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Joseph2302 and thanks for explaining that my edit was okay. As for the first question, do you know what can be done? (My IP is different as I am on a dynamic IP range) 45.251.33.17 (talk) 08:01, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello dynamic IP 45.251.33.xx! I think selectively removing entries that are not verified could be misleading as readers are likely to assume that the listed are the most important ones. The best thing, IMO, would be to get rid of the tables and add prose about the company's history of products, which should automatically include all the verifiable and important bits about the various models it's launched. But since editors there have gone with the table, I don't see a problem with listing all of them as long as the size remains manageable. And I don't think it would be too hard to source. So, I would either look for sources for the unsourced ones, or just add a {{refimprove section}} tag. I don't usually remove mundane details on non-controversial topics that are unlikely to have been fabricated just because they are unsourced. Do note though, I am only giving you my opinion because no one else did, and I hardly ever edit technology articles, so it's perhaps best you bring the issue up at the article's talk page. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:51, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

List of biologistsEdit

Having worked off and on with the List of biochemists since June I now have it in a state which corresponds better with how I think it ought to be (though as recently as today I noted two distinguished Israeli scientists who needed to be added). Others may think I've created a mess: if so, please let me know.

Anyway, I've started on the List of biologists, and have reached end of the letter A. However, as I'm a biochemist and not another sort of biologist I have less confidence in my judgement as to who should be listed. They need to have a Wikipedia page, of course, but what else?

I have a more specific question on which I'd like advice from experienced editors. Many entries contain notes like "(abbr. in botany: F.Allam.)" (at least three under A, many others under other letters). I can see that botanists want to know these abbreviations, but they can easily find them in the pages on the people concerned, which are all linked. How important are they for general readers? If I delete the whole lot will I be blocked for vandalism? Athel cb (talk) 14:00, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

How do I add some images in an article?Edit

Hi everyone. Just need some little help. I was wondering how I can insert images in an article. I've been reading some copyright rules so I became hesitant. Thanks. Apollogone (talk) 11:20, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Apollogone, are you thinking of any particular images? If you are, where are they at present? Maproom (talk) 12:36, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
@Maproom: Nothing in particular, I just wanted to ask for future references. But if for example I wanted to add an image of a company or person in the article, and search through Google, how do I know if the image is valid for use? Apollogone (talk) 05:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
If the page where you find it has a note saying that the image is in the public domain, then you can use it in Wikipedia. If it says that it's protected by copyright, then you can't. If it doesn't say, then you should assume that it's protected by copyright, unless you have good reason to know otherwise. Maproom (talk) 07:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Camden Monarchs Afc is declinedEdit

I am not able to get some specific comment to understand the reason of decline this page (Draft:Camden Monarchs).

I have used reference which are already used in reference of other wiki pages. Requesting to either fix or help me to fix if any issue exist.

In between I have added another reference link and done minor edits. Please review and help me. Vsp.manu (talk) 17:31, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Vsp.manu I believe your draft currently does not passes specific notability requirements. See notability (clubs) to learn more. ~ Amkgp 💬 17:43, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Dear ~ Amkgp 💬, Thank you for your guidance. I have gone through your suggested link to learn more. And I feel References give are supporting the notability. Also few American Basketball Association (2000–present) teams(like San Diego Guardians, Jersey Express, Dallas Impact etc) have their published wiki page having more or less similar information given on their wiki page.
Also this team Draft:Camden Monarchs is listed on wiki page of ABA as well. So please guide what more to explore and include or which part I should exclude to accept this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vsp.manu (talkcontribs) 06:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC); edited — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vsp.manu (talkcontribs) 06:42, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Vsp.manu, would you explain which notability criteria you think the topic meets? Or, if it is the generaly notability guidelines, ie. that the topic has received significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources, would you please list WP:THREE of the best sources you have? Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:15, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Usedtobecool ☎️, Thank you so much for your response. I think it comes under the generaly notability guidelines, ie. that the topic has received significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources. Please find following three sources :
https://abaliveaction.com/2019/05/31/camden-monarchs-added-to-aba-expansion/
https://whyy.org/articles/monarchs-bring-hoops-and-hope-to-camden/
https://6weekstofitness.com/interview-with-giovonni-thompson-ceo-of-camden-monarchs/

I feel following sources can also be considered as reliable and notable reference as well.
https://nypost.com/2020/03/30/inside-rysheed-jordans-fight-for-basketball-redemption-after-prison/
https://www.nationalblackguide.com/youngest-african-american-female-owner-brings-professional-basketball-team-to-camden-new-jersey/
Also, hope you are considering the ABA team's wiki page which are already published and almost similar reference sources are used in that. Please suggest, if anything I can improve in Draft:Camden Monarchs to get this approved. With Regards!Vsp.manu (talk)

Draft:Camden Monarchs Afc is declined ..Edit

I am not able to get some specific comment to understand the reason of decline this page (Draft:Camden Monarchs).

I have used reference which are already used in reference of other wiki pages. Requesting to either fix or help me to fix if any issue exist.

I have gone through suggested link to learn more notability. And I feel that references given are supporting the notability. Also few American Basketball Association (2000–present) teams(like San Diego Guardians, Jersey Express, Dallas Impact etc) have their published wiki page having more or less similar information given on their wiki page.

Also this team Draft:Camden Monarchs is listed on wiki page of ABA as well. So please guide what more to explore and include or which part I should exclude to accept this.

Dear User:Timtrent, please guide me in fixing and accepting this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vsp.manu (talkcontribs) 09:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC); [edited] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vsp.manu (talkcontribs) 09:09, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Vsp.manu: (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) 'Pinging' another editor like Timtrent only works if you mention their name and correctly sign your post in one and the same edit. Not only that, but it ensures we can tell who it is who is actually asking a question here! Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:59, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, Nick Moyes.
@Vsp.manu: I tend to avoid sporting drafts, leaving them for a more specialist reviewer to review, but thank you for thinking of me Fiddle Faddle 11:04, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
I have pinged a few more editors at the first discussion which is towards the top of this page. Any further discussion should be held there. Someone may merge it there if they'd like. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

ConcernEdit

I would like to seek assistance from the house. Two of my articles on two notable Ghanaian musicians were recently moved to draft space for COI and notability. The truth here is, the article Draft:Sherry Boss is a nominee of Ghana's biggest music festival, the Vodafone Ghana Music Awards and also notable for his rap music. On the other hand, Draft:Flyboy Geesus (musician) is the other half of Ghana's popular music duo Phootprintz. The other half has an article as Mista Shaw. I need to know why the articles do not meet the requirements. Ajpoundz (talk) 12:02, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ajpoundz, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia uses its own notion of notability, which is not the same as the usual meaning. You need to show that the musicians meet the criteria in WP:MUSICBIO. --ColinFine (talk) 14:23, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine, thanks and per WP:MUSICBIO, the article is notable for been a nominated for Vodafone Ghana Music Awards and also known for Boss Nation, see https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/entertainment/Lilwin-threatened-to-end-my-career-after-stealing-my-brand-Sherry-Boss-584438 Ajpoundz (talk) 15:15, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

  • Is your argument that the VGMA are "major" enough to qualify per WP:MUSICBIO #8? It seems a bit dubious to me. Regardless, special notability guidelines are intended to be a proxy for the likelihood of the existence of good sources - meaning that we do not really care if they were nominated to award X, but being nominated to award X usually brings a lot of press coverage, so we assume notability is met. If you searched for a long time and found no sources satisfying WP:GNG, it would indicate that they are not notable, even with those nominations. TigraanClick here to contact me 14:55, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks User:Tigraan ! My argument is not solely based on the fact that he was nominated for a notable award. There is alot of press via GNews to affirm notability, see: https://www.google.com/search?q=Sherry+Boss&rlz=1C1CHWL_enGH822GH822&oq=sherr&aqs=chrome.2.69i59l3j69i57j46j69i60j69i61j69i60.2670j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Ajpoundz (talk) 15:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Ajpoundz, no one is going to look at search results from google. You'll have to take the usable ones and add them to the draft. When you've done that, you may list the WP:THREE best at the draft's talk page and direct reviewers to check them. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:29, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to How can I add my name to a list of American Art Dealers?Edit

Why is it almost impossible to find a simple way to ask a question? Wikipedia appears to be an intellectual endeavor but is a defacto closed shop with editors who may no very little about the nature of wikipedia itself. I was told I could not add information because there is NO advertising. The answer this: Isn't almost EVERYTHING on it an Ad, especially about living people. If one is not allowed to write about themselves then isn't possible or easy to get a friend or partner to write what they want and put it up for them. There would be no way for your Ed. board to know for sure. If I have someone write about my life in the field, but I have no copies of my articles that I can show because they are not on the www since most were written in the late 80s. I do have a PDF of a recent article 2012 can I use that? If I was a founding member of a well known organization when it was formed, but I am no longer a member what can I do? Another question albeit a horrible one: What if someone on wikipedia was a serial killer and only one person knew about it??? What could they do to comment about. I know it would mean a lot of work, but what about a simple Email address divided into subjects and or cities, people by alphabet to make it eaiser? Geoffrey D. Forrest (talk) 16:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Geoffrey D. Forrest, What Wikipedia needs to see is significant coverage in non-affiliated reliable sources. For instance, if a (non-local) newspaper or magazine did a story about you, that would be significant coverage in a reliable source. We need to see about three such articles. Sources don't need to be online. I'm sorry, I don't understand the serial killer and email questions. —valereee (talk) 16:29, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Tell me about the stories about you -- how long are they, how much of them are actually about you (rather than simply mentioning or quoting you briefly), and what were the publications? —valereee (talk) 16:35, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Just because something isn't online doesn't mean it can't be cited. You just need to provide the sources and it is up to someone to verify them - but this is where you shouldn't write about yourself. Koncorde (talk) 16:33, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Geoffrey D. Forrest, if you have evidence someone is a serial killer, you should contact the authorities,  whether the person has a Wikipedia article or not. It's their job to sort out the loony tune crackpots from people with valid information, not ours. John from Idegon (talk) 17:09, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
    John from Idegon, I think maybe what he's asking is how do we know we can trust one another to be editing in good faith because we're all ostensibly "anonymous"? GDF, we all have edit histories anyone can check -- mine is at Special:Contributions/Valereee, yours is at Special:Contributions/Geoffrey D. Forrest -- and over time we see whether a person is consistently making good edits. When someone new comes in, other editors tend to check their edits for a while until we can see they're making constructive edits. When we come across someone who is making unconstructive edits, and they don't seem to be trying to improve, we block them from editing. —valereee (talk) 20:32, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
To address some of the issues raised - it is surprisingly easy to tell when someone is related to the topic they are writing about. It's only natural for them to ever so slightly violate our neutral point of view policy, among various other things. On a different note, not everything here is an ad. I don't think that Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations is an ad for him, let alone the fact that it has gotten 240 thousand pageviews this month alone. If you're interested, this may be an interesting read. Giraffer munch 17:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Giraffer, ideally NOTHING here is an ad. If you see something that looks like an ad, you should fix it, or if you aren't sure how, tag it as wp:promotional. —valereee (talk) 20:18, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Good point, valereee. I've had my fun with G11 tagging... :) Giraffer munch 20:35, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

To get back to the original set of questions from Geoffrey D. Forrest, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that lives (and dies) by its requirements for verification of facts. Hence published and referenced. The refs do not need to be accessible on line. People are advised to not try to create articles about themselves, but not forbidden. See WP:AUTO Friends/family also allowed, but advised for sake of transparency to declare the nature of their conflict of interest. See WP:COI. For the 2012 article you mention, you cannot use the PDF (copyright infringement), but you can create a reference is you have the name of the publication, date, etc. Wikipedia trusts information submitted by editors. If the organization you helped start has an online history that mentions your role, that can be a reference. As for lists, you cannot be on a list unless there is already an article about you. David notMD (talk) 10:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Help Needed to Globally Deselect the Left-Panel Page Languages Summary gizmo feature and return to the Old Ways of the One List to Rule Them All and on the Page Bind Them!Edit

Globally Deselect the Left-Panel Page Languages Summary gizmo feature and return to the Old Ways of the One List to Rule Them All and on the Page Bind Them!

Hello all!

In the left panel for each page is a list of the Languages each article may be found in. This list now only shows a few "popular" languages, then tidies the rest away in a summary that says "All languages (initial selection of common choices by you and others)".

Is there any way to turn this summarising off in my Global Preferences settings?

I read wikipedia articles in all sorts of languages depending upon the regions I am researching, even for languages such as Catalan which is often far more informative about their locales than the broader Spanish wikipedia. I will also look at things like the Magyar wikipedia for articles about their former territories in Romania, Slovakia, Croatia, Moldavia and the like. It is probably useful for people who love to stroke their iddy-biddy phones, but for us people with nice big screens and a love of wikis in all the languages of this fine Earth it is a pain in the arse rather than a great new feature.

Thanks.

Nobbo69 (talk) 21:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC) Nobbo69 (talk) 21:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Nobbo69, welcome to the Prancing Pony Teahouse. Are you using a custom skin? I'm using vector and i just click on the button below the popular languages and a search box pops up to find the language i'm after. Zindor (talk) 21:44, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Nobbo69. If you go to your Preferences, and pick "Appearance", then right down the bottom you'll find "Use a compact language list, with languages relevant to you." --ColinFine (talk) 21:44, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

@Zindor - thanks - it is exactly that I am trying to remove! I like to see all the language options quickly when I am researching things. I research a lot of medieval and ancient topics all over the world and they often do not fit into the modern language / nation-state boundaries we have now, so I will check wikis in several languages to get the best info as quickly as I can and check the smaller wikis like the Hungarian Magyar wiki all the time.

@ColinFine - thanks, that's exactly the button I wanted to unpress! It is very hard to do general searches for things about the inner mechanics of Wikipedia on Google when you do not know the specific name for something - like Compact Language List in this case - as it tends to just throw up normal articles. Someone needs to do a nice clear Wikipedia For Idiots Wiki... Thanks again! Nobbo69 (talk) 03:14, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Nobbo69: glad that helped. I had no idea what it was called either; I just guessed that there might be a user preference for it, and went looking in Preferences. --ColinFine (talk) 10:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Moving an article from DraftsEdit

Hello, I was inquiring to see the status of an article I drafted. see attached link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hamage_Records. I have one and cited sources, even updated the reference list. How long will it take before my draft no longer has the word draft attached to it?

Thanks in advance Musicnewgen3ration (talk) 23:51, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Just a Question, did you mean to put your "sources, even updated the reference list. How long will it take before my draft no longer has the word draft attached to it?" in a preformatted text? It (as I learned) can bug some of the editors. Would you like to change it to normal text? Thanks,
User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 23:56, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
@Shadowblade08: I suspect that someone with less than twenty edits has absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Surely, we don't expect them to say "yes, I intended to F up, and bug editors!" I am sure that new editors who unknowingly make mistakes (what is "preformatted text", to a newbie?) would have been most pleased not to have made them in the first place. At least, here at the Teahouse, let us try to give them a break! Be kind! Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 03:22, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I figured that he was new, and had no idea that you would take it like that. My intention was to be kind, because I know that when I accidentally put words in preformatted text, they kinda overreacted. Sorry, just trying to fix an mistake, and lets just let it go, cause its fixed now. Cheers, User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 14:35, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Shadowblade08: I regret my comments, which were very "snarky". I did not WP:AGF towards you. Please accept my apology. Sincerely, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 20:59, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Let's Purrfect!, I absolutely forgive you... I know that i've done it before, and while there may be something wrong with it, (I don't want to say "no problem" cause as you said, it is a problem) it is easily forgettable, and in the end, Hey! at least the conflict is over with! Thanks for catching that, and I really appreciate it. Cheers, User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:12, 21 September 2020 (UTC)


Hello. Musicnewgen3ration, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I made that change. I believe the questioner had an unintended line return and space before the second part of the sentence. David notMD (talk) 10:21, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

The page Draft:Hamage Records has not been submitted for review by the Articles for Creation project. If you want to submit it, please add {{subst:submit}} tpo the top of the draft page. It would then be reviewed whenever an AfC reviewer got to it. That might possibly happen in a day or two, but might easily take up to two months or more. There are currently over 3,000 drafts waiting for review. Reviewers take drafts in whatever order they please, and not on a first-in, first-out basis. Drafts may be edited and improved while waiting for review.
If this draft were submitted for review as i8t now stands, I confidently predict it would be declined. None of the four sources currently cited is independent. Two do not even mention Hamage. There normally need to be multiple (at least three) independent published reliable sources, each of which has Significant coverage of the topic. There are currently none.
If the draft is not submitted for review, no one will automatically move it to the article mainspace, although any autoconfirmed user could in theory do so. If it were moved to the main space in its current state, it might well be nominated for deletion and deleted, for lack of notability Please read our guideline on the notability of corporations.
In short this draft is nowhere near ready to be an article.
I hope that is helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Did I find an Error?Edit

In the Rapala Article,

When it talks about the Rapala Giant 6ft lure, why was it listed under the "tools"? Quote,

"...and various fishing tools as well as the Rapala Giant 6 foot Lure."

Cheers,

User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 23:52, 20 September 2020 (UTC) 

@Shadowblade08: If you have an idea to improve an article, you can be WP:BOLD and do it or start a discussion on that article's talk page. I would consider a lure a type of fishing tool, so it seems OK to me, but I am not a fisher. RudolfRed (talk) 00:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Shadowblade08 and welcome to the Teahouse.
Honestly, the long list of lures, with no detail about any, is not really encyclopedic and should provably be removed. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:35, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
OK, Thanks for the info on that. I didn't want to just cut it out, before asking and making sure that it was OK. Thanks! User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 01:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I cut it. Turns out it really is 6 feet long, but it is art intended to be hung on a wall, so neither lure nor tool. David notMD (talk) 10:29, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

OK, David notMD, that makes sense. Thanks. Also, RudolfRed, I added a new section on the Rapala Talk page, however the last people to say anything on the talk page was years ago, and I think it would be fair to consider the Rapala's talk page inactive. (minus me, of course) Cheers, all, User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 18:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Is my page up on Terry Williams (sociology) complete ?Edit

Is my page up on Terry Williams (Sociologist) complete ?

Is my page up on Terry Williams (Sociologist) complete ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Williams_(Sociologist) Pcdevitt (talk) 00:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Pcdevitt and welcome to the Teahouse.
No, Terry Williams (Sociologist) is not complete. It currently reads like a resume or CV, not like an encyclopedia article. It has a list of Williams's publications, and of the positions he has held, but nothing summarizing what others have written about him. It says that he has been covered in various publications, but does not cite any of them, so there is no way for a reader to verify this. In fact it does not actually cite any sources at all, which is not acceptable for a biography article about a living person (see WP:BLP and WP:BIO). It does not establish Williams's notability. See Our guideline to the notability of academics. If not improved, this might well be deleted shortly. Please read Your First Article, Wikipedia's Golden Rule, and Referencing for Beginners, as well as the other pages I have linked above. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:05, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Pcdevitt: Note: Article has been moved to draft space at Draft:Terry Williams (Sociologist). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:20, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Second note: Draft has been deleted for copyright violations. Ghinga7 (talk) 20:28, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
A copy-and-paste was made to another page which eventually wound up at Draft:Terry Williams (sociologist). That page has been cleaned and the copyright issues revision-deleted away. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:29, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Rapala photoEdit

Hello there, in the Rapala article, if you hover over the "Rapala" it shows no photo, and I was wondering if there was a way to add a photo to the thing... sorry I can't really describe it, but I will try to answer any questions you ask. Cheers, User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 03:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC) User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 03:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

For me, clicking (Ipad) shows the logo. What sort of photo are you looking for/expecting? There are nice photos of lures, in the article... Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 04:06, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello there, and Thanks, (I added only one of them, though) what I was saying, was that on a MacBook, (what I edit with) when I hover over the "Rapala" link, it doesn't show anything, unlike other links. Does this help? User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 14:44, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Shadowblade08:, I am so sorry, I have no idea. Perhaps someone else can help....Best of luck to you, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 21:14, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, Tribe of Tiger! I can certainly ask someone else, and in fact, I may just drop the subject in the end... it probably has something to do with my "view", and I suppose its different on a iPad compared to a MacBook. Thanks for the help, and Cheers! User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
If you mean the wordmark "Rapala®" at the top right of the article in the infobox, then it is already an image, with a link that says "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rapala_Logo.svg", which when clicked will take you to an enlarged version stored on Wikipedia Commons as an .svg file. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 10:51, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Can I add a new page for community purposes?Edit

 Zaharia Idamate (talk) 04:31, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Zaharia Idamate, I'm not quite sure what you mean there, do you mean a page for the Wikipedia community like a WikiProject? Or do you mean an encyclopedia article about a community? Pi (Talk to me!) 04:35, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
New pages here are for Wikipedia:Purposes. Does your proposal further the aims of Wikipedia?--Shantavira|feed me 07:51, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Behavioral FinanceEdit

Behavioral Finance is an independent study of the behavioral aspects of investors in particular and how it has an impact on the markets. Behavioral Finance and Behavioral Economics both stem from the same stream of thoughts, the subject of Psychology but have different application. I request that my article which has been declined, kindly help me improvise it so that it can be established as an independent article. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Sakamridhi/sandbox&redirect=no - is the link to the article on Behavioral Finance. Sakamridhi (talk) 06:00, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sakamridhi. This appears to be the same topic as Behavioral economics, or a tiny variation. Wikipedia will not have two articles on the same topic, so I suggest that you work to improve Behavioral economics instead, unless you can make a compelling case that these are two discrete and distinct topics. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:08, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
User:Sakamridhi - What User:Cullen328 has said is the same as what I said when I declined the draft and tagged it to be merged into Behavioral economics. Draft:Behavioral Finance appears to be about the same topic as Behavioral economics, or almost the same. If they are almost the same, they can still be covered in one article. If they really are separate topics, then please explain in AFC comments or on the talk page how they are separate topics, and rewrite your draft to make it clear that they are different. However, it appears that they are either two names for the same topic or two related topics that can be covered in one article. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:55, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

how to use wikipediaEdit

 Fyuko (talk) 06:50, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Fyuko: Please see your talk page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Strange evaluation of a article draftEdit

The draft Draft:Vladimír Daněk was declined by the User:Nightenbelle and here is his reason: "Most sources are primary, subject has not placed better than 2nd in regional tournaments and has received almost no coverage by independent secondary sources outside of his niche."


The note: "subject has not placed better than 2nd in regional tournaments" clearly shows that User:Nightenbelle did not read the draft at all. As the subject won regional (national) championship more than 10times and placed 2nd at the 1997 European Championships. I have to assume that he evaluates draft that is out of his scope. Is this procedure standard for wiki editors? To1al (talk) 07:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

  • I do believe that Nightenbelle (who is a "she") should have declined the draft rather than rejected it; the former leaves the possibility to review and resubmit. She might want to comment here now that she was pinged.
This being said, the crux of the matter is that current sources do not demonstrate notability, i.e. that there are multiple sources (1) independent of the subject, (2) reliable, (3) writing/talking about the subject at length. I could not find anything more than pseudo-interviews where VD is interviewed ex officio to give an expert comment on Go matters. Note that search results are polluted by a Slovak chemist homonym.
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Go#Notability_of_Professional_Go-players gives a criterion that may or may not be accurate to assume players above "professional 4-dan" can be assumed notable. If that criterion is correct, and I read correctly the Elo-rank conversion table at Go_ranks_and_ratings#Elo_ratings_as_used_in_Go, then VD's highest rating of 2635 falls well short of that criterion. TigraanClick here to contact me 14:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
the reason I rejected rather than decline was because I had to do some research to learn a bit about the game and subject before I could review the article.... in doing so I found no more sources on the subject.... so I didn’t see how it could possibly have been resubmitted and have a chance at success. I probably should have just declined anyway but... the sad fact is- some people can be absolutely amazing at what they do- and still not qualify for an article. Especially in a niche area. Nightenbelle (talk) 21:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your oppinion. For the norability matter: there are some almanacs weher is VD citeted, but they are focused on go only. Probably still will be considerd as insufficient. But what about the point where one of the reason was "subject has not placed better than 2nd in regional tournaments" which is definitely not true. To1al (talk) 07:06, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
    @To1al: The placement reason was wrong, but it also was irrelevant, which is why I did not mention it.
Re almanacs, there are two points: whether the source is reliable and independent and whether it describes the subject at length. Being a Go-centric publication is not a problem in itself, although there might be problems of independence (e.g. if a friend of the editor is the subject of the article). The real problem is rather the second criterion - in my understanding of the term, "almanachs" mean basic reports of tournament results, player ratings etc. which would fail the "describe at length" test.
Take as an example Europe Échecs. That is a chess magazine; I assume no non-chess player reads it, and it probably has a much lower circulation than obscure regional newspapers; but it is generally considered fairly good for reporting on chess topics. A detailed article about the career evolution of player X would probably be a solid source supporting the notability of that player. However, a tournament report that X placed at such-and-such place against such-and-such opponents would not, because it does not "describe the subject at length", it only is a WP:ROUTINE announcement of things that the magazine would have covered regardless of which player got which results. TigraanClick here to contact me 09:06, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  • @Tigraan: Thank you for the explanation. Based on this argumentation, all players outside of Asia would not satisfy above criteria. That means, there should not exist any article describing European players as well as European pros List of Go players. Which is not true or the pages should not be on wikipedia. Am I correct?  To1al (talk) 12:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
    @To1al: Not necessarily. Articles are evaluated on an individual basis. For example, Antti_Törmänen_(Go_player) (the first page I clicked) has two sources that meet GNG criteria to my eyes (interviews such as this do not count much because the content of the interview is obviously not independent of the person. If you find another article lacking sources, try to find some and if you do not, nominate it for deletion (or bring it up here and we will do the nomination for you). TigraanClick here to contact me 13:00, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Why bots undo my editsEdit

— Preceding unsigned comment added by That random man (talkcontribs) 08:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@That random man: I see a message on your talk page from the human editor GorillaWarfare, who reverted the inappropriate question you added to Civil Administration Area of Luxembourg, for the reason stated in his her message; the article is not the place to put questions – use the article's talk page (Talk:Civil Administration Area of Luxembourg) to discuss the article with other editors. FWIW, I believe the flag is correct for the article, as it refers to Germany-occupied Luxembourg, but I could easily be wrong as it's not my field. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC) [corrected] —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Also, you can view a complete log of all changes, their editors, and the reasons behind them (so-called edit summaries), by clicking "View history" in the header tabs for each page. GermanJoe (talk) 09:04, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Removing the "introduce improved citations" message at the top of the pageEdit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Des_Wilson The information is all correct and I don't want the question box at the top of the page. 83.150.248.44 (talk) 09:24, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

The box at the top of the page was there for a good reason. The only statement in the article supported by a reference was the subject's date of birth. An article that lacks references to establish that its subject is notable and to verify its content is liable to be deleted. I have reverted the article to its state before you deleted all its referenced content, thereby removing the box and averting the risk of deletion. Maproom (talk) 09:44, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Maproom: Another concern here are .44's edit summaries: "changed in accordance to named person's wishes." and "As per author's instruction". I think that this may be a problem, (in addition to the wholesale removal of sources.) What do you think? If the article was "about me", I wouldn't want the sources removed! Confused...Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 21:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Tribe of Tiger, I agree. All of the IP's contributions to Wikipedia have been to Des Wilson, or to make the request above. They have been made at Wilson's request, and in contravention of various Wikipedia policies – though in good faith. 83.150.248.44, if you're reading this: you ought not, as an agent of Wilson, be editing the article at all. The proper way for you to proceed is to specify the changes the subject would like on the article's talk page, where they can be considered by editors familiar with Wikipedia's rules. One relevant rule is that new material should not be added without being referenced to sources; another is that referenced content should not be removed without a very good reason. Maproom (talk) 07:11, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

"new page here about my company"Edit

Hi there , im new here , i was trying to make a new page here about my company but it was declined, can you guys help me out form this horrible satiation, thanks in advance. Kamerockint (talk) 09:44, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Kamerockint. You are abusing Wikipedia and all its volunteer editors if you believe you can use it to promote your company without taking the time or trouble to learn how Wikipedia actually operates, and what it's for. So, yes, you have got yourself into a horrible situation. First off, you are obligated to declare your connection to Kamerock Films Productions, per instructions at WP:PAID. You may not have a promotional username (so you might get 'soft-blocked' for that) and have to choose another one (see WP:USERNAME). Your company, as wonderful as it may be, probably doesn't meet our notability criteria for businesses, where we require at least three independent sources which show your company has been written about in detail and in depth. See WP:NCORP for how we judge whether you are wasting your time or not in this attempt. Wikipedia is not here to help you promote your business or employer (see WP:PROMOTION), and you would be better to leave the creation of an article to editors without a Conflict of Interest. Please ceased any editing until you have at least formally declared who is paying you and, should you wish to persist (based on gathering only non-promotional references), ensure you go through our Articles for Creation process. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Kamerockint: I have trouble understanding why this is a "horrible satiation [situation?]" unless you and your company have a complete misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. If your employer is requiring you to break our fundamental rules as part of your job, please see WP:NOTPROMO and show it to them, along with the other sections of that page. There should be nothing "horrible" about whether an article exists or does not exist in this encyclopedia, any more than if it were to exist or not in Encyclopædia Britannica or any other academic reference work. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 11:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

21st century telemarketing and digital marketing for cleaning businessesEdit

Hello everyone!

I am reaching out to know if Wikipedia will enable me to post information about my business that incorporates telemarketing with digital; 21st-century marketing combination allowing commercial cleaning companies to connect with offices, hospitals, commercial centers, and even private residences.

Although may seem promotional yet our process could act as a safety measure during these tough times. Workplace sanitation is crucial today for flattening the curve.

Admins and moderators of Wikipedia, please advise.

Best regards,

Nadia M. Janitorial Leads Pro Janitorial Leads Pro (talk) 11:18, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Janitorial Leads Pro blocked for business-associated User name and intent to promote a business. David notMD (talk) 12:52, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Janitorial Leads Pro, the answer is no. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:32, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Recent ChangesEdit

How do you like navigate Special:RecentChanges, there are sooo many edits, even if I try to use filters to limit it. Humiebees (talk) 14:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Humiebees, what exactly do you need to patrol recent changes for? There are numerous (IMO better) alternatives for a number of different purposes. Giraffer munch 15:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

List of British artistsEdit

I wish to add two artists to the above lists. I am a newbie, do I need permission to add to the lists? Dmunge (talk) 14:43, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

As long as those artists already have a Wikipedia article about them, there should be no problem. Please see WP:LISTPEOPLE.--Shantavira|feed me 14:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Dmunge:, they can also be added if there are reliable sources WP:RS added as references, to prove their notability. See WP:ARTIST, for guidelines. They still must meet WP notability guidelines, but perhaps an article has not yet been written. Hope this helps! Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 21:48, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Trouble with a user.Edit

Hello guys,

There's this user "Angelatripp" who is solely using Wikipedia for about 9 years for just a single page. He keeps undoing several revisions (same topic) in the name of "preventing vandalism." There's multiple references to back-up my claim as Jonathan Seigel one of the founders of the subjected page, but he keeps undoing it. I am going to edit the page again, but please someone prevent him from real vandalism!

Thanks! Kingoftheyuno (talk) 15:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Kingoftheyuno, I believe your suspicions have merit and it could be a case of undisclosed paid editing, although the editor in question has not edited since 21 March 2019. The first venue to raise these concerns is the article's talk page (Talk:RightScale), and failing that, the conflict of interest noticeboard. I will leave some notices on the user's talk page; a review of the article content would also be in order. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

how do make articleEdit

um yeah

 Chonker chonkingtin (talk) 15:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

 83.49.205.237 (talk) 16:03, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Help:Your first article -- Fyrael (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Do categories for people by century go by birth year?Edit

I'm new to categorizing articles and came across Category:Nigerian medical doctors, which has subcategories Category:20th-century Nigerian medical doctors and Category:21st-century Nigerian medical doctors. My assumption is that each person should be placed in just one of these according to birth year (which would mean all the articles in the 21-century category are misplaced), but I guess it's possible that we include people in any category during which they were alive and/or were active in the field (in which case a whole lot of those in the 20th-century category should be also added to 21st). Can someone please confirm which case is correct?  -- Fyrael (talk) 16:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I guess I found my answer at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Categories/Archive_6#Which_century_to_use_when_breaking_down_by_century. -- Fyrael (talk) 16:44, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Fyrael: I'd say based on all the years they were "active" as doctors (generally med school through death?). Ameyo Adadevoh is appropriately in both 20th and 21st categories. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, that was the conclusion I came to based on the archived discussion. Seems like a whole lot of those in 20th century should be added to 21st then. -- Fyrael (talk) 04:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse Archive 1074: "Images in infobox showing death / suffering"Edit

Referring to: Teahouse Archive 1074: "Images in infobox showing death / suffering" <-- need help to link this properly, sorry.

Just came across this discussion/question User:Konkorde started then. And I hope this is the right place to discuss it further. If not, please refer me to it. While I agree, that WP should not be self-censored: I would draw the line where the moment of death is involved. (Sorry, I'm not a native english speaker, some words escape me.) Maresa63 (talk) 16:43, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Maresa63, if you'd like to have a discussion about what Wikipedia policy should be about this, I'd recommend starting at WP:VPP. Or if this concerns a specific article, I'd recommend starting a discussion at that article's talk page (e.g. Talk:Killing of George Floyd, but I believe this has been discussed there repeatedly). The Teahouse isn't the best place to have discussions about what policy should be. Good luck! Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer Calliopejen1. I'll look for discussions there, if not for chiming in, then at least for readind. --Maresa63 (talk) 06:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Help postingEdit

I'd need to hire someone to post my article on the Wikipedia site concerning "Treasure in Search of the Golden Horse" I'm not a computer geek and I don't have the time to learn all the coding to do it myself, Please Help Thank You 2601:340:4201:AF00:5C40:5745:5381:6309 (talk) 17:03, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. We already have an article with that title here Treasure: In Search of the Golden Horse you are free to add reliably sourced content to that. Theroadislong (talk) 17:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

How can we get help/ guidance for a wiki- hackathon?Edit

We have a group of people interested in updating an article on Wikipedia. We plan to host a session to update and add information to this section as it is related to a field of work we are involved in. We would love to invite a current editor to help guide and participate so we are doing this well.[[1]] (cross posting from Talk page) MassCollaboration (talk) 17:19, 21 September 2020 (UTC) MassCollaboration (talk) 17:19, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@MassCollaboration: Just so I understand this correctly, you're intending to have a group of editors collaboratively improve the article Entrepreneurship ecosystem? And can you let us know whether you have any commercial interest (see WP:COI) relating to the subject of the article? With this information, we'll be able to help you better. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:14, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for responding, I am a community activator for a foundation that focuses on entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurial ecosystem building is one of our focus areas. There is a community of practitioners we have been convening for some time and one of our goal projects is to update the wiki entry. We have an event coming up next week and we would like to host a mini- hackathon. There is no plan to monetize any of the information and I am happy to share the event, backstory and answer any questions you may have. It's a unique opportunity wherein a large number of people who identify as entrepreneurial ecosystem builders would work in collaboration to add to the article.MassCollaboration (talk) 23:21, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@MassCollaboration: Hmm. I would recommend declaring your conflict of interest on your userpage and reading WP:PAID (I don't know offhand whether you qualify here, but read the policy and comply with whatever it requires). Step one to improving the article is identifying reliable sources about the topic -- books, journal articles, newspaper/magazine articles probably to a lesser extent. Step two is reading those sources and incorporating the information from them into the article. You could do step one before the event and distribute sources to your attendees. Or you could have attendees identify sources during the event and work from them. What you want to AVOID is people writing the article from their own personal knowledge, which violates Wikipedia policies and will likely end up being quickly removed. Please emphasize the need to work from the sources. I'm not sure if there is an easy way to advertise for someone to help you with your event. You could also try posting at WP:VPM. I'd advise you to read Wikipedia:Expert editors to understand some of the pitfalls you may encounter. And PLEASE do not introduce promotional content into the article. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your helpful resources. I'll share this information with the other facilitators and participants. Is there a way I can DM you or others to fully explain the event and who the attendees are? MassCollaboration (talk) 14:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@MassCollaboration: To be honest, I have next to no interest in this subject area, so I'm not inclined to get further involved (we're all volunteers here!). You could post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Business to see if anyone there is interested? You might also want to post at the relevant geographic location Wikiproject to see if any local editors want to help you, e.g. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Massachusetts. Or you could look at the contacts at WP:GLAM. You're not exactly in the GLAM space but maybe someone there could point you in the right direction... Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:28, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! MassCollaboration (talk) 21:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I downloaded 6 items . A message is that approval. I don't know from whom.Edit

 Thomas75Russell (talk) 17:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Thomas75Russell, welcome to the Teahouse. Can i ask what you downloaded, and from where? Thanks, Zindor (talk) 17:51, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Also, Thomas75Russell, consider doing this. I played it, and it helped me a lot to learn how to use Wikipedia. I wish you the very best of luck, and if you want to ask me a question, consider talking to me here. Cheers! User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 17:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I am new here. Looking around. Started yesterday.Edit

 Thomas75Russell (talk) 17:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, again, Thomas75Russell, This is Shadowblade08. Do you need help on using Wikipedia? Again, I would recommend playing the Wikipedia Adventure. Cheers, User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 18:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Removal of sourced contentEdit

On the 2020 United States Senate election in Delaware, an IP address user continues to remove sourced content where the Republican nominee is described as a Trump supporter. Sources include CBS News, Chicago Tribune and The Daily Beast. I have already warned this user. Can this page be locked, so the vandalism ends? Pennsylvania2 (talk) 18:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Pennsylvania2. I suggest you post on the article's talk page and discuss this issue with the I.P. Should the need arise, the venue for filing protection requests is Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Regards, Zindor (talk) 18:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
User:Pennsylvania2 - This does not appear to be vandalism, but a content dispute. Not all disruptive editing is vandalism. Semi-protection can still be used if an unregistered editor edits stubbornly and does not discuss. Not every edit that you dislike is vandalism. Not even every disruptive non-neutral edit is vandalism. Political editing can get unpleasant. Please do not make it unnecessarily unpleasant by yelling vandalism when it is an unpleasant political content dispute. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:06, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

How many bags can checkin free of chargeEdit

 2605:E000:1527:C30B:30E0:7341:A3AC:15C (talk) 18:21, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, this page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please refer to the website for the airline you are traveling on for the answer to your question. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

How to prevent a page an image is used on from appearing in the “file usage” or “what links here” section on the file pageEdit

I’d like to start learning how to create templates and user boxes, and I’m wondering if there is a way to keep a link to whatever userbox or template I create from showing up as something that links to an image I use in that template. Thanks for your help! Raven(Zing) 18:44, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ravenzing: Not as far as I know. Wikipedia is by design as transparent as possible. I'm not clear on why you want to hide the usage of the image. Perhaps you can elaborate and we might find a way to do what you're trying to accomplish. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Question about a speedy deletionEdit

Hello. So about 30 hours ago, a speedy deletion request was put on Impeachment Articles against Mike DeWine. I am the creator of the page and contested the speedy deletion. No one has responded/commented about it and per the speedy deletion rules, I cannot remove it. Would an editor please remove it as it seems there is no one "fighting to delete it". {Also this article went through an afd process a month ago and wasn't deleted}. Elijahandskip (talk) 18:50, 21 September 2020 (UTC) Elijahandskip (talk) 18:50, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I have declined the speedy deletion because the previous AfD had a result of "draftify" and not a result of "delete". However, i think it likely that this article will be nominated for deletion again. Please do ping me if it is. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:15, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Elijahandskip, I can't see any evidence of a previous deletion, so I have removed the (incorrectly placed) tag DESiegel beat me to it, but please stop trying to force the article. You nominated it for ITN, which was SNOW closed, and then a subsequent AfD discussion resulted in consensus to draftify, which you did, but soon moved it back to mainspace after not much improvement or time (both important factors given the WP:NOTNEWS concerns at the AfD). Please slow down. Regards, Giraffer munch 19:16, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Elijahandskip, I think the above advice by Giraffer is sound. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:57, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
I would add, Elijahandskip, that once a speedy deletion tag is placed, it does not matter if anyone is "fighting to delete it". If the tag is valid, the page/article should be deleted, and if it sin't the tag should be removed. The tagger need not, and normally will not, do anything beyond placing the tag. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:00, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
This is now being dfiscussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Impeachment Articles against Mike DeWine, Elijahandskip. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Request for review of bio of a living personEdit

Hello! I wrote my fourth bio of a living person, Ben Collins-Sussman, and I wondered if I could get some feedback from currently active editors:

User:Catavar/sandbox/Ben_Collins-Sussman

Here is the first paragraph so you can decide if you're interested:

"Ben Collins-Sussman is an American software engineer, composer, and author.[1] He is the co-creator of the Subversion version control system, co-composer of the critically acclaimed musicals Eastland,[2] and Winesburg, Ohio,[3] and co-author of two books on software and management.[4][5] He co-created two award-winning interactive fiction games, Rover's Day Out and Hoosegow.[6] Collins-Sussman lives and works in Chicago, Illinois.[7]"

I really appreciate anyone who has a few minutes! Thank you, Teahouse. Catavar (talk) 19:23, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Catavar: I see a lot of puffery in the intro (critically acclaimed, award-winning). I also am very skeptical that he qualifies for a Wikipedia article; see WP:NBIO. I did not look at the references in detail, but just because someone creates a notable work (and, btw, it's not clear to me that any of his works is notable either) does not mean they themselves are notable. I would expect a few reasonably in-depth pieces about him in newspapers/magazines as a rule of thumb to qualify for an article. Only reference 1 is specifically about him, and it's not that substantial. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:45, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@Calliopejen1: I appreciate the review! It's a tough line to walk; my understanding is that winning awards and receiving positive critical reviews in major newspapers are important information for deciding notability. But I agree that the phrase "award-winning" will cause suspicion even if followed by a citation to the awards won. I removed those phrases and similar summaries of awards and critical reviews for the avoidance of resemblance to puffery, while leaving the information they summarized intact. On the topic of articles solely about the subject, most of his significant work has been done as a collaboration with at least one other person, resulting in most of the independent third-party sources being about him and at least one collaborator. Thanks again and I am open to more ideas for improving the article! Catavar (talk) 21:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Moving Articles from Draft to MainspaceEdit

I used Articles of Creation to make an article about a subject I had a conflict of interest on, and then submitted it for review. To have an article reviewed more quickly Wikipedia told me to add tags, but when I tried to add tags it said the article couldn't be found, so I figured that this was because it was a draft and moved it to the mainspace. Now it says that the article has been reviewed, and I'm a little afraid that I did that, and this means that I shouldn't have moved it. It seems unlikely that someone already reviewed it, and that's making me think that maybe I was supposed to leave it in drafts and I accidentally sidestepped the process? It's my first article, so I haven't done this before.

Should I move it back to drafts? The article is entitled "Daxbot (Robot)" Lizzythetech (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

The text is now at Draft:Daxbot (Robot), Lizzythetech. As a paid editor you should not move it to mainspace yourself, but wait for a reviewer to approve it and do so. It has now had one AfC review, with a result of "decline" which means "not ready yet, improve this and try again".
I am not clear what sort of tags you tried to add, or exactly what message you got. If you want help with that, please provide more detail. Quite a few different things can be referred to as "tags" here. (Think of it like a bug report from a user. Exact detail matters.)
Please fill out the references more. In particular indicate who is responsible for a source. When it is on a company website, this must be indicated clearly. In addition, please supply the publication date and the author, when these are known. When the publisher adds useful context, please suppl;y that too. See referencing for Beginners, please. When a source is online, please give the date retrieved. This helps find the proper archive version, should a link go dead later.
On the merits of the draft itself, it is not ready for the main article space yet, in my view. There are not yet enough independent published reliable sources that give significant coverage. Three of the 6 current sources are not independent. One is purely local coverage. One is about an award of debatable significance. One is at least partly an interview, which reduces its value, and I'm not sure of the reliability of Freight Waves. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:24, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much! I can't say how much I appreciate the help. I updated the article (someone commented that it sounded like an advertisement, and I saw what they meant), and added a few secondary sources. I'd love any more feedback on whether it's ready before I re-submit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lizzythetech (talkcontribs) 21:51, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Draft approved, Lizzythetech. Oh in future please indent replies with one more colon at the start of each paragraph then the previous msg in the thread had. (use {{od}} if indents get excessive.) And please in future remember to sign your discussion and talk-page posts (but never articles) with four tildes (~~~~). I hope you continue to edit. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:20, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Yay!! Thank you for the tip! I'll be sure and do that. Lizzythetech (talk) 16:02, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Can I change a redirection?Edit

Just now I was looking for the New York Convention Center, a now-defunct convention center that was active until the 1990's. When I typed New York Convention Center into the search box, I was taken to the Javits Center, the center that replaced it. After more searching, I just learned that I had the name wrong - it was actually named the New York Coliseum, so I found it. My question is, can I change whatever it is that is redirecting people to Javits Center when they type in New York Convention Center? I think that would make more sense, since the New York Coliseum was New York's main convention center for decades, and it actually has New York in the title. Da Bronx Bronzer (talk) 20:29, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

 Sir Lancelot of the Lake (talk) 20:31, 21 September 2020 (UTC) Took the liberty of striking a stray sig. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:37, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sir Lancelot of the Lake, and welcome to the Teahouse.
It may well be that more people who type in "New York Convention Center" are looking for a currently operating convention center in NYC, which would indeed be the Javits. It might be at a Disambiguation page would be appropriate. This should probably be discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion, whose header says: If you think a redirect points to the wrong target article, this is a good place to discuss what should be the proper target.. Thank you for wantign to improve Wikipedia. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
I think you are responding to the wrong person. Sir Lancelot of the Lake (talk) 21:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Da Bronx Bronzer: While we can change the redirect target, this situation calls for more caution: we don't know who's searching for the NY Coli and who the convention center active after 2000. You're welcome to open a discussion at Redirects for discussion as DESiegel mentioned aboveTalk:New York Convention Center and notify the relevant WikiProjects, but a more straightforward solution is to put a hatnote on Javits Center using {{Redirect}}, which I've done. (Note to Teahouse hosts: should we have kept the {{About}} hatnote that was there? I dislike multiple hatnote templates, but would having separate ones in this case be clearer?) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:37, 21 September 2020 (UTC) and edited 21:41, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
That note you added to the top of the Javits page would have saved me a few minutes of searching. That looks like an impressive solution! Thank you for doing that. Da Bronx Bronzer (talk) 21:56, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Article titles and possessivesEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
It's been a long time since I've been to the Teahouse, hope you're doing well! I just have one question about titling a Wikipedia article. Is there a rule about whether we should title an article in the form X's Y or Y of X? For example, I came across the articles Albert Einstein's brain and California's 12th congressional district and also these articles History of China and Moons of Jupiter. My understanding is that we should title the articles based on usage in English-language reliable sources. Is there a page on Wikipedia that explains how to title possessives? Interstellarity (talk) 20:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello again Interstellarity
PleaSE SEE Wikipedia:Article titles md particularly WP:COMMONNAME. As far as I know, there is no general convention favoring either X's Y or Y of X. Specific topic ares have specific conventions. For example, articel about monarchs usually use the "of" form (for example Anne of Cleves or Henry VI of England. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@DESiegel: I'm guessing that articles on royalty, it is titled like that because it is proper English. It is the form recommended at WP:NCROY. I just have one question, could part of the reason be that it is proper English? Interstellarity (talk) 23:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Indirectly, yes, Interstellarity or so I would suppose. It is the recommended form here because it is often used in reliable sources, and they use it because it is good English. In any case my point is that individual naming conventions, like WP:NCROY, should be consulted in any actual case. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:46, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

How can I help?Edit

How can I help? Hi, is there any way for me to help this project? I am not an expert in anything, and I am not really interested in any one topic. Thanks Sir Lancelot of the Lake (talk) 20:35, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Sir Lancelot of the Lake! There are many ways you can help on the project. If you look at WP:TASKS, there are things such as Anti-Vandalism where you can revert edits that damage the encyclopedia and categorizing pages so they are easier to find. Hopefully you find something that interests you. Interstellarity (talk) 20:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the link! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sir Lancelot of the Lake (talkcontribs) 20:48, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Sir Lancelot of the Lake, I have compiled a small list of things that new users can do easily here, if that helps. Regards, Giraffer munch 16:44, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! Sir Lancelot of the Lake (talk) 22:17, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Fair Use Image & Deletion RequestEdit

Hi, Would greatly appreciate some assistance to correctly use or delete an image on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Litman.

I wanted to add a low res image of a logo which was kindly provided, after my request, by the owner for use under FAIR USE guidelines. The image cannot be stolen & used for any significant benefit or damage. It is included only to educate & inform about a podcast. It is no different than an album cover or cover of a book. I have uploaded three versions, in response to BOT messages & trying to properly follow Wikipedia rules & process, but to no avail. I am besieged by bots & threats of deletion. Sadly, I am at the point of needing deletion of all three art files.

Can anyone help me either keep one image or to request that all three images be deleted? I really have no clue how to do either of these things.

Many thanks in advance, ApplePieMom ApplePieMom (talk) 21:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

ApplePieMom, please disclose any wp:coi you have with the article subject. We can work with you on that, but hiding it often ends with blocks from being able to edit. —valereee (talk) 22:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Valereee: Message text. ApplePieMom (talk) 10:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi :Valeree, Thanks for responding. I have no Conflict of Interest wp:coi with the subject: I have no ties with the subject. I do not work for nor have I ever met the subject. As a listener of podcast I am familiar with subject’s work. Edits I have made are in the public domain ie print, online, tv. I contacted the subject for artwork. I wanted to learn about Wikipedia editing so I chose a simple subject to begin, something which lacked current info & which would allow me to work with artwork or a photo. The edits I made with links benefit users of Wikipedia. But, beyond simple text editing I am utterly lost. Your help would be greatly appreciated. —ApplePieMom
ApplePieMom, we allow fair-use images in very limited ways. This image is the logo for a podcast. A low-res version would totally be fair-use for the main image in an article about that podcast, but the only reason we could use it in Litman's article would be if something about the logo itself was being discussed. Like maybe someone had found it offensive or clever, and had written about that somewhere, and we'd reported what they wrote in the article about Litman in the section about the podcast. We could justify the fair use of that copyrighted image then, because it would be illustrating something we were discussing in the text. The reason behind all this is that Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. The owner of an image can upload it themselves, but they'd be uploading it under a free-use license, which of course means anyone can use it for anything they want to use it for. When you sign your posts, use four tildes -- that puts not only your username but the time and date stamp. If you only use three, it leaves off the date. Not a big deal, but it helps other editors follow the conversation. :) —valereee (talk) 10:57, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Oh, sorry -- and you don't need to worry about the deleting, it'll happen automatically. I know it can be alarming to suddenly have all those warnings on your talk page, but you can delete them. They're really just notifications. :) We have a tutorial you can take, I've left a link to it on your talk. —valereee (talk) 11:08, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Valereee, Thanks so much for reply & explanation. I totally understand. Can you assist me in deleting the visible logo image along with the 2 additional that I unintentionally uploaded? With much appreciation. ApplePieMom (talk) 11:07, 22 September 2020 (UTC)ApplePieMom
ApplePieMom sorry, edit conflict. See above -- we were both responding at the same time. —valereee (talk) 11:12, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi :Valeree, Again thanks so very much for the Tutorial & info about how deletions work. ApplePieMom (talk) 11:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)ApplePieMom
Hi :Valeree, I just looked at the Harry Litman page and was astonished by edits that now included new spelling & grammatical errors & removal of factual information by people who fashion themselves as arbiters & editors. My interest in Wikipedia is as a professional editor & journalist and I am taken aback by today’s notations & errors. It’s one thing to ding me for making technical errors. It’s something else to editorialize. As a matter of principle & factual necessity I have made corrections, added factual information & citations. Your notation that it reads like a resume is concerning. Don’t the wikipedia bios of most accomplished govt officials read like resumes? As a former journalist I think the statement is biased, has a negative connotation and should be removed in the message. I also see discussion about the subject’s wife by another editor. From news, videos & published rankings she is in fact an accomplished jiu jitsu athlete & champion. As for the subject’s children their names appear in recent news articles. Again, as a trained journalist I sense bias and a disregard for unvarnished factual information. Very disappointing for a platform that has a lot of potential. ApplePieMom (talk) 16:18, 22 September 2020 (UTC)ApplePieMom
ApplePieMom, Okay, in order: Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit. That means inaccuracies get inserted; we generally get it right in the end, but it can take a while. Removals of content by experienced editors are generally because the content wasn't cited to a reliable source or it was a copyvio. We try never to editorialize; if you see that, ping the editor to the talk page (use {{u|username}} and sign your post with four tildes to make sure the ping works). No bio should read like a resume; when we find one that doe, we suspect there's been COI editing and we mark it as such. We actively want that COI tag to have a negative connotation, as a way to discourage COI editors from editing directly instead of making edit requests at the talk page. We try to protect (possibly minor) children by not mentioning their names, even if they've been mentioned in press reports. Sorry you're disappointed, but honestly you're sounding more and more like a COI editor with literally every sentence you write. I strongly advise you to simply disclose it; we can help you if you do that, and we'll forgive you for doing it; we've seen it many times, and we understand the impulse. We can't help you if you have one and don't disclose it. —valereee (talk) 19:08, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
BTW, your pings are failing because you're using Valeree instead of Valereee, yeah, I know, it was a bad decision. —valereee (talk) 19:28, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi :Valereee, Thanks for your message. I think we’re just crossing wires. Most of the stuff you’re editing / removing has absolutely nothing to do with what I have contributed. Hardly a COI. The points I am making have to do with principle not the subject and my developing my understanding of Wikipedia editing. The same issues & questions are applicable to any article. I totally agree with you about not including children. But, as another editor noted, some info such as this is out in news stories, as I discovered in an online search was the case here. Also a connected person, like a spouse: shouldn’t their accomplishments be cited? In this case I did not know specifics, rankings, etc until I looked them up today. So I was citing facts: results, rankings. Again, my learning process: where was the issue? Lastly, I understand you have concern about COI as a Wikipedia Admin, something I fully agree with, but casting aspersions & making accusations is inappropriate and counterproductive, especially when someone notices several errors & fixes or flags them. As I said before my editing has been no more than a blip in this article. I would think that an editor who does research on a subject & contributes only facts & appropriate citations - not opinion or false material - would be welcomed at Wikipedia. Instead I was greeted with assumptions & accusations. Lesson learned. ApplePieMom (talk) 19:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)ApplePieMom
Hey, ApplePieMom, no aspersions intended. A spouse who doesn't have an article often isn't mentioned by name, but in this case since she has a reasonable claim to notability, I redlinked her. How did you know she was a three-times winner? Did I miss that in the source? —valereee (talk) 20:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
BTW :Valereee, I agree with you that the whole article was generally a mess. As a new editor I think one overlooks the forest - the whole. After I saw your editing I understand what you have done. I see your focus. ApplePieMom (talk) 20:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)ApplePieMom
In truth, Valereee, both aspersions and false accusations came my way the more I asked questions and pointed out errors. I am in no way a major contributor to this article. But, I now have a pretty good picture as to what Wikipedia is all about. You ask how I know something, that the spouse is a 3 time champion. Where does anyone find info about rankings related to sporting events & athletes? Also, look at the citations that were in the original Wikipedia article that someone else put in. I wanted to learn about Wikipedia & editing & to do it correctly & with FACTS. Yet, attention to detail & facts obviously doesn’t sit well with Wikipedia experts. A person who is precise is harangued with COI & other nonsense. Or, maybe I have COI because I can spell perfectly while editing. I don’t know what redlink is, but I assume it is the red highlighted name, which from the article I first saw here is the mother, not the spouse. Btw: The spouse’s name also appears in media reports differently from what is on Wikipedia now. Why would a Wikipedia admin change someone’s name? Facts are facts. Or do they not matter on Wikipedia? Good luck to you Valereee. I now know for sure not to trust anything on Wikipedia. ApplePieMom (talk) 02:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)ApplePieMom

ApplePieMom I want you to learn about Wikipedia editing and to do it correctly, too. It's your statement that you do not know this person, and I will assume good faith and take you at your word. I think we can probably stop discussing here since there's now discussion happening at article talk, with multiple contributors. This will be very helpful for you, as it'll give you a chance to see how Wikipedia articles get improved and to work collaboratively to improve one. —valereee (talk) 12:09, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

new userEdit

Hello. I created a page on a public office holder but when it is searched on google etc., I can't see a thumbnail for the photo, an overview or a short description under the name, as it appears for other similar wikipedia articles of politicians? How can I add these features to my article? Thank you! Khabarnama (talk) 21:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Khabarnama, welcome to the Teahouse. I believe you are experiencing that problem because Google's crawlers haven't indexed the page yet. It's just a case of waiting. Regards, Zindor (talk) 21:56, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Articles are only indexed when they are atleast 90 days old, see WP:INDEXING --Nintendofan885T&Cs apply 17:06, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Actually, Nintendofan885 that isn't quite correct. Articles are indexed after 90 days, or after a member of the New Page Patreol reviews the article, whichever coems first. After that time the article can be indexed by search engines, but they do not always do so at once, and Wikipedia has no control over that. @Khabarnama and Zindor: DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:18, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@DSSiegel: Oh right, I didn't see the NPP bit when I read the page when I read the page the first time --Nintendofan885T&Cs apply 17:26, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
In the case of Syed Sajjad Bokhari, which i assumed was the article in question, the draft was moved by an editor with the autopatrolled flag; which had the same effect an NPP review would. It is possible to manually add a url into Google's indexing queue but that's typically a waste of time given how fast indexing can happen nowadays. On rarer occasions Google ignores metadata completely and indexes unreviewed pages. Regards, Zindor (talk) 19:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Help!Edit

Hello, I was never able to complete the Wikipedia adventure, (the reason? I answered that in the feedback for TWA) And was wondering if you could fix it. Thanks, Shadowblade08 (talk) 21:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

The Manual of Style says "X" so you are wrong.Edit

I have a concern that needs some other editor's perspective.

I make good faith edits and get reverted or edited over with the justification that "The Manual of Style" says so and so.

It seems that some parts of the MoS is good policy and reflects a necessary "rule" to follow.

It seems that some part of the MoS is good guidance.

It seems that some editors strongly believe that every word of the MoS is Wikipedia dogma and must be followed without question.

In the Squaw Valley Ski Resort article, editor @Jtbobwaysf was adamant that the led must have only 4 paragraphs rather than 5. The edit was justified with the "excessive paragraphs in the Lead Paragraph". The edit to make the 5 paragraphs into 4 paragraphs just deleted a line feed so it added the "fifth" paragraph to the end of the preceding paragraph without consideration of the importance of the paragraph.

Jamming two paragraphs together is not supportive of information presentation. With the "forbidden fifth paragraph" obscured, a reader could easily miss something that might be the key to continue reading the article.

In this case, the offending paragraph was about Squaw hosting 1960 Olympics, which was without a doubt, is the seminal event in the history of Squaw Valley. Here is the "dif" for that edit:

Dogmatic following of the MoS potentially diminishes the quality of content and content presentation.

Reasons for doing unnecessary edits because "The Manual of Style says "X" so you are wrong" is not necessarily good Wikipedianship.

What is a reasonable approach with regard to some of the more benign "violations" of the MoS?

Osomite hablemos 21:54, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

@Osomite: MOS:LEADLENGTH already says that it is not an absolute rule. Discuss on the article's talk page to get consensus on what would be the best fit for the opening section of the article. If you can't get consensus, then follow the guidelines at WP:DR to resolve the dispute. RudolfRed (talk) 22:31, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
RudolfRed is quite correct. It appears that this has been discussed (and i hope settled) at Talk:Squaw Valley Ski Resort, which is the correct place. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:50, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
The OP was trying to add a single sentence that Squaw Valley was the host of the olympics, and admitted that was insufficient weight. I disagreed with the single sentence approach and moved the sentence up into the first paragraph. Hard to believe this is now here being discussed again. Seems to be PR edits, or at least an editor really stuck on the importance or reputation of Squaw Valley. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Adding an infoboxEdit

Hello- How do I create and insert an information box in an article? Thank you in advance. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 23:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC) Maryphillips1952 (talk) 23:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Maryphillips1952 and welcome to the Teahouse. Such boxes are normally called "infoboxes" here. Usually there is no need to create a new infobox -- there will be an existing box that mcan be used. Infoboxes are implemented as templates, and are inserted by placing the name in double braces followed by any parameters. Example: {{Name here |parm1=value |parm2=value}}
See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes, Help:Infobox, Wikipedia:List of infoboxes, and Category:Infobox templates.. See also Help:Template.
Different infoboxes support different parameters. Only the supported parameters can be used -- any others will simply be ignored.
I can't advise which infobox would work best without knowing what article you have in mind. Not all articles need or would benefit from an infobox, and one is never required. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello, DESiegel, I have a question along the same lines. Is it possible to insert a Infobox on your User page? (Please note that i'm not trying to interrupt your conversation, and will gladly move my question elsewhere.) Cheers, Shadowblade08 (talk) 23:49, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
It is technically possible, Shadowblade08 but very strongly discouraged. It makes the user page look like an attempt at an artivcel, whoich may be enough to get the entire page deleted under WP:CSD#U5 (use of wikipedia as a web host). Your user page should be about you as a Wikipedia editor. Brief biographical info is OK, but there should not be enough that an infobox would make sense. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:04, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello and thank you all for the links and help. I created and inserted my first infobox (Cecilia Arizti) following the template of another musician's infobox.I have a question about placement on the page and how to place further up on the page. Thank you for your feedback. Maryphillips1952 (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Maryphillips1952: At Cecilia Arizti, the infobox is correctly placed at the top of the page and renders correctly, AFAICT. What do you see wrong? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:24, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
It looks as if it should be further upon the page,but not sure. I appreciate your prompt feedback. Thank you!Maryphillips1952 (talk) 00:27, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
In this edit I moved the info box from below the lead section to the very top. As the lead is short the difference is small, but visible. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:42, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Oops. I forgot to look at the history to see if I was looking at the same version as Mary. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Looks great! Thank you!Maryphillips1952 (talk) 00:57, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
   I added two successful infoboxes following the template.  However, I am having problems inserting the following infobox in María de las Mercedes Adam de Aróstegui.
María de las Mercedes Adam de Aróstegui
 
María de las Mercedes Adam de Aróstegui
Born(1873-09-24)September 24, 1873
Died(1957-10-20)October 20, 1957
Madrid, Spain
Musical career
Occupation(s)Musician, Composer
InstrumentsPiano

Thank you in advance...Another question... finding photo images to use. How do you know if there is photo available in Wikicommons? Can I upload a photo in the public domain when I perform a Google search - public domain? Thank you!Maryphillips1952 (talk) 06:59, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Maryphillips1952: You had missed a closing ] on the birth_place parameter and didnt actually closed the outer infobox. I have added it. I have also deleted two duplicate params. Regarding images, plase do NOT upload images found using a google search to Wikimedia Commons. 99% of the images found on the internet are copyrighted, and the fact that they are freely available doesnt change that. If you want to know if there is a photo already on Wikimedia Commons, I sugegst using the search function with the namespaces set to "File" and a resonably keyword. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:16, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Victor Schmidt mobil, some photos found on the web are public domain and can be uploaded to commons. Maryphillips1952 is asking about finding those by searching google for images that are categorized that way. MP1952, you can upload such photos to Wikimedia Commons, but be careful to fill out every box you possibly can very thoroughly when you are filling out the licensing portions. :) —valereee (talk) 11:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Maryphillips1952 If you can find public domain images via Google search, or in any other way, you may upload them to Wikimedia commons. But you must be confident that the image is in fact in the public domain. Images (and other works_ first published before 1925 are in the public domain under US law (which commons uses). Images never published, but created before 1900, or whose creators died before 1950, are also PD. There are other ways for an image or other work to become PD, see this famous chart for details. But it is not sufficient that a google search for PD works returned a particular image. (We don't know how Google makes such determinations in a given case, but it can well be incorrect.) You must specifically confirm that the particular image qualifies, and in the upload explain why the image is PD. In that regard Valereee is quite correct above. If you can find an image already on commons that fits the article, that saves any concern over the matter. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:32, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
   Thank you, everyone. I really appreciate all your help.Maryphillips1952 (talk) 23:44, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Notability TagEdit

How to remove Notability tag in this article Sumit PathakAnupamsuwar (talk) 05:54, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Anupamsuwar: Thats described in the box. You would need to add reliable (no user-generated content) independent sources (no interviews or press releases) with significant coverage of the subject (not yust passing mentions) to show that this topic meets WP:ANYBIO. If such sources cannot be found, the topic my be not siutable for Wikipedia. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Over-referencing does not help. The article does not need five references to confirm his place in the contest, nor seven refs to confirm multi-country tour. David notMD (talk) 10:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@David NOTMD: Won't the notability tag remove?

SourcesEdit

Can books be sources? I am having some trouble with Brendon Tuuta (rugby league). I want to add information from the highly-respected Rothmans Rugby League Yearbooks. Is this acceptable? Do I need to add page numbers? Garyslater61 (talk) 12:08, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

 2409:4064:4E8C:6699:75AE:B4CB:4BD3:6B7D (talk) 13:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Garyslater61: yes, books and other written texts like newspaper articles are acceptable sources, as long as they are published and can in theory be accessed by the interested reader. And YES, you need page numbers. The persons that want to check verification status are not going to read 1000 pages yust to confirm something. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:22, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Google docs as a reliable sourceEdit

The article Leah Penniman cites a google doc that Penniman wrote herself describing pronoun usage. Is this a reliable source? I couldn't find anything about it specifically in WP:RELIABILITY but maybe it counts as a self-published source. Thanks 9H48F (talk) 13:41, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

9H48F, good grief, that section of the article is ridiculous. We can use a self-published source for such information, but in this case I'd limit it to something in a 'Personal life' section like "Penniman identifies as genderqueer." Everything else...no. —valereee (talk) 16:54, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Valereee thank you! 9H48F (talk) 18:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

G5?Edit

Hello! I have a question. If a blocked user created a few pages, will all of them be deleted as per CSD G5?Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Corrosive liquid) 13:45, 22 September 2020 (UTC) Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Corrosive liquid) 13:45, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Acid Of Carbon, only those created during the time that they were blocked. The pages that they created before being blocked, between their blocks or after their last block do not qualify. In addition, such pages should not have significant contributions from other editors who were not blocked or banned at the time that they contributed to them. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:52, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

confusion challenge ... where is my post my articleEdit

 Nazarasvitlo (talk) 14:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Nazarasvitlo: Are you talking about Draft:Nazar Pankiv? If yes, that draft was deleted over one year ago because it was not worked on for 6 months. It was not a live article. You can generally request the draft to be restored, but unless you can demonstrate that the subject meets WP:NPERSON, you are probbbably wasting your time. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:50, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

missing informationEdit

Hello, everyone! I have a question. I can't understand what else information is missing from my article. I think I've found enough reviews and articles about this person, but looks like that's not enough, I don't understand what I should do; can you tell me how to improve it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anton_Adasinsky. Its written that "they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject "???? MakhinaDzhu (talk) 15:07, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MakhinaDzhu, and welcome to the Teahouse. Note that the draft has not been reviewed since it was restored after G13 deletion. Improvements done since then have not yet been checked. I am looking at the draft. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

User PageEdit

I have only been here for around five days, so I'm new. I don't have a user page, though from what I understand, I should have one. I made one, but on the wrong place. I accidentally made it on Wikipedia's article sandbox, where you make normal articles. I submitted because I thought that I was submitting it for a user page, but found out it was on the wrong place when I saw a button at the bottom saying "this is probably on the wrong place. Move this to a User page here." or something along the lines of that. I don't quite remember. I tried to move the page, but my account wasn't yet four days old, so I couldn't move it. It is now five days old, and I was going to move it, only to find out it had already been reviewed and rejected. This all caused some questions. Do I still need the User Page? How do I move it to where it's supposed to be? Where is it supposed to be? How do I submit it for being a User Page? SquirrelB8 (talk) 15:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello SquirrelB8. You do not need to "submit" your user page anywhere. Just click on your red linked signature, start the page, write something about yourself and hit "Publish changes". That's it. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:42, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@SquirrelB8: Note that you don't have to have a user page – many users don't. It's not like a social media profile. It's just a place to briefly introduce yourself, collect useful links and lists for your work here, etc. You can see your contributions at Special:Contributions/SquirrelB8. The page you've been working on is User:SquirrelB8/sandbox/User:SquirrelB8 instead of User:SquirrelB8. The easiest thing to do in this case, since it is all your own work, is to open the sandbox link, copy the contents from the edit window, click on User:SquirrelB8, paste the contents in the edit window, and save it. You can ask that the old page be deleted by adding {{db-u1}} at the top of the text and an admin will come along and delete it at some point. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:11, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Permission to edit article "Fuck."Edit

How do I get permission to edit the article "Fuck"? My edit would add an example of the use of the word in the section titled F-bomb. The edit would appear at the end of the section. "Another example of use of the word occurred when Heisman Trophy winner and future first round draft pick of the Tampa Bay Bucs stood on a table in the Florida State University Student Union and shouted,, "Fuck her right in the Pussy." Pierre, Natalie "Florida State Suspends Jameis Winston for Clemson Game" Tallahassee Democrat. Sept. 20, 2014). John D. Maher (talk) 15:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello John D. Maher! Per WP:SEMI, you should be able to edit it now. However, IMO an edit like that will probably be reverted, with a motivation like "per WP:PROPORTION, who cares?" Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:12, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@John D. Maher: Forgive me for making this observation, but, because you are a complete newcomer to Wikipedia with a lot to learn about our ways and methods, and despite being a mature professional person, I can't help thinking your skills and efforts would be far better directed towards editing articles which are simpler and easier to improve than this one. I have reverted your edit for the reason explained in my edit summary. We have over 6,000,000+ articles here, many crying out for major improvements which any competent English writer such as yourself could enhance with ease. You might wish to read WP:REFBEGIN to learn how to add good citations to some of these articles. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

How do I go about developing an article on a Nigerian PoliticianEdit

I would like to begin developing an article on a politician. How do I go about this? JanussunaJAI (talk) 16:40, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, JanussunaJAI, and welcoem to the Teahouse.
Creating new articles from a blank start is one of the harder tasks on Wikipedia, perhaps the hardest an inexperienced user is likely to face. I urge you to use the Article Wizard to create a draft under the Articles for Creation project. There, an experienced editor will review your draft once you think it is ready. Only when a reviewer approves will the draft be moved to the main article space. This avoids the situation where a deletion is requested soon after the initial version of an article is posted.
Also, please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article, if you have not already done so. The advice there can be very helpful, in my view.
The following steps, if followed carefully, often lead to success.DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:46, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  • First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of people. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
  • Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
  • Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
  • Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
  • Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
  • Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
  • Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request here or at the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.
Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:46, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello Janussuna, and welcome to the Teahouse! The best way to create an article is through this page. Have a read of it and follow the instructions. It's a great way to learn how we create articles, and what makes a successful one, as well as good way to get familiar with our Articles for Creation process, the way in which most articles are published. Hope this helps. Giraffer munch 16:50, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Article concernsEdit

Hi, I wrote an article about Smart Computing and I wanted to know how to change the title of the article and if it will be published in a permanent link ? Hamadanouri (talk) 17:48, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

  Courtesy link: User:Hamadanouri/sandbox ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@Hamadanouri: The usual way is to click on the "submit your draft for review" and someone will move it to Draft:Smart Computing and later on someone will review it. HOWEVER, I read it and my first questions I would ask if reviewing this is "Why is it capitalized? Is it a trademark or other commercial term? If it is, who 'owns' the term - an industry standards body, a school or other institution, or a for-profit entity? Would anyone benefit financially from having this page created? Does the primary author of the page have a conflict of interest that should be declared? Is a paid editing disclosure required?" If it is not a trademarked or other "proper noun" term, I would also have questions like "is this content better placed in existing articles, such as smart object, distributed computing, and edge computing?" If you do submit it, I recommend you move the page to Draft:Smart Computing yourself, create the Draft talk:Smart Computing talk page, preemptively answer these questions, THEN submit it. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:16, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Now exists as Draft:Smart computing (platform) and has been Declined (meaning see if you can make it better, per the reviewer's comments). David notMD (talk) 20:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I think the "Nevada" page was vandalized.Edit

I went to the "Nevada" page here in Wikipedia, then I saw it vandalized. Can someone please go to the "Nevada" page, and fix it, and put a warning inside the "edit"? MannyPC (talk) 18:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. It looks like that editor has been busy but his work is already being reverted. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC) Update All of those edits have been reverted and the editor has been notified. For what its worth, I would not consider this vandalism but rather a good-faith effort to improve Wikipedia by an editor who did not realize those edits would be controversial. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Do all pages lead to philosophy? Why or why not?Edit

An xkcd comic claims that if you click the first link not in parentheses in any wikipedia page, and keep doing that, you would eventually reach to the page philosophy. Is there a proof for this? If so, what is it? Are there any counterexamples? What would make a page a counterexample? 18:33, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

haha. I just tried 6 random articles and did indeed end up there. To prove it or disprove it generally, I think you would need a database WP:DUMP and then crawl through all the links to see where they lead. RudolfRed (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Check out Wikipedia:Getting to Philosophy which discusses this. Its talk page shows counterexamples. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 19:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
See ALL WIKIPEDIA ROADS LEAD TO PHILOSOPHY, BUT SOME OF THEM GO THROUGH SOUTHEAST EUROPE FIRST. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Inserting Team Win-Loss Records as a Column Corresponding to a Players Statistics Row per Season on Player Statistics TablesEdit

I suggest that adding a Column showing Win and Loss Record per player season should be incorporated into every Player's Statistics Table for all athletes. 2605:E000:9ACB:FC00:D062:48F2:C6F6:C4E4 (talk) 19:11, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure what it is that you're proposing, but I'd recommend you post your proposal at WT:SPORT rather than here; editors here can answer your questions but can't really determine the policies about what content articles should contain. Thanks, Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:33, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Choosing a "country of origin" for a TV showEdit

I was going through the Wikipedia rules today but couldn't find any part of the rules or guidance which talk about a country of origin for a TV show or other media production (like an animated series). I'm interested in this because I'd like to cite a part of the rules on the Roswell Conspiracies: Aliens, Myths and Legends talk page. Anyway, I'd like to know, is there are specific part of the Wikipedia rules / guidance which talks about this? I'd imagine there is, but I just didn't know where to look. Thanks. --Historyday01 (talk) 19:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC) Historyday01 (talk) 19:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Historyday01: If no one here replies promptly, I'd recommend asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television where you will probably find the people most experienced in this issue. Calliopejen1 (talk) 20:32, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll see if anyone will respond to that there next. --Historyday01 (talk) 20:32, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

WIkipediaEdit

So i have a question i have been getting reports that people are editing dumb stuff is this true Thegoat999 (talk) 19:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Thegoat99, anyone can edit, so naturally there are going to be a few unhelpful edits. Some are made in good faith, others are vandalism and should be undone. I am what we call a counter-vandal, in that my primary work here is reverting vandalism. Take a look through my contributions to see what vandalism reversion is like. Regards, Giraffer munch 19:56, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Mistake on Conflict of Interest, Can I remove it from my page?Edit

Hi! I am requesting help regarding conflict of interest in my own personal page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zmlutz15. I misunderstood the requirements for a conflict of interest. For some background info, I became interested in becoming an active Wikipedia user during the quarantine. When setting up my account, I wanted to use it to update specific areas of interest/importance to me as I worked through my graduate studies in business sustainability. Particularly, I wanted to add in new information while I read through my newer textbooks. When asked if I had any conflicts of interest when setting up my account I added the author of my textbook because he is also a professor at the same school. However, I am merely just one student in a large classroom of grad students and the professor, Dr. Sroufe, is unaware of my personal hobby in Wikipedia and my interest in adding some research from his books to certain pages. Per my understanding, this is not a conflict of interest defined by Wikipedia. Therefore I would like to remove my conflict of interest from my page because I have attempted to publish numerous edits about sustainability, but they are always taken down by other users that cite my conflict of interest. I really want to keep editing on Wikipedia and don't want my newfound interest to be ended because of a simple mistake. Can someone help provide me with the steps to remove this conflict of interest from my page?

Thanks! Zmlutz15 (talk) 19:45, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Zmlutz15, I would remove the template, but leave a sentence saying that you are editing about sustainability as a hobby, but that you do have ties to the person you mentioned, and that it might be helpful for others to know. The template is generally used more by people who have a formal COI (i.e. being hired or directly asked to edit about a person) as opposed to an informal COI (merely knowing the person). I would also try to use other sources when possible, to avoid giving the impression that his sources are your focus. While not disallowed, removing all traces of a past COI will seem a little strange in some editor's eyes.
N.B. I am not an expert on COIs so anyone can feel free to correct me if I have gotten something wrong. Regards, Giraffer munch 20:13, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@Zmlutz15: If you will not be taking any classes from him and he will not have any effect on your academic career or be providing you with any other benefit, then you are probably okay, assuming you don't have any other "close connection" to him. If it's more than remotely possible that you will take a class he teaches, that you will ask him for a letter of recommendation, or that you will work under his supervision in the next few years, then you should consider yourself as having a "conflict of interest" until that is no longer the case. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Perhaps avoid using as references any work written by Dr. Sroufe. David notMD (talk) 20:39, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
You forgot to mention that you attempted to create an article about Dr. Sroufe, which was Speedy deleted as promotional, and that the only editing you have been doing since June is adding Sroufe as a Reference or Further reading to various articles. That is considered spamming. Find another avenue for your desire to be a contributing editor. David notMD (talk) 21:44, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

When editing how can I add colourEdit

 Waivarosa (talk) 19:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Waivarosa, could you be a little more specific? (i.e. what you want to change the color of?) Thanks, Giraffer munch 19:57, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Contractions in articlesEdit

Is it grammatically correct to use contractions like don't and won't etc. in articles? I've seen it go both ways and I don't know which is correct. Meetertound (talk) 20:08, 22 September 2020 (UTC) Meetertound (talk) 20:08, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Meetertound, could you give an example? I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but the answer to your question probably lies somewhere here. Giraffer munch 20:15, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Meetertound, hello! See MOS:CONTRACTION. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:14, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
That helped. Thanks! Yeah, I meant shortened alternatives for full verbs (e.g. don't, would've, she'll). Meetertound (talk) 20:18, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Meetertound, generally when I use those, someone comes along behind me and corrects them to do not, would have, she will. I believe I am the one in the wrong, here, but I have a difficult time training myself to do this as it does not come naturally to me. :D —valereee (talk) 21:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Stupid question but how do you add replies to others' talk page threads?Edit

I see it all the time with them indented, do you just tab or is it something else? Mossypiglet (talk) 20:11, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Mossypiglet, hello! Indenting is done by adding colons (:), See WP:INDENT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Mossypiglet, it is a colon. Giraffer munch 20:18, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
You
can
indent
text
quite
a
lot
by
just
adding
more
colons!

Take a look at the wikitext for this section to see how they are used. Giraffer munch 20:18, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks both of you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mossypiglet (talkcontribs) 20:20, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Is it necessary to link nationailities in articles?Edit

Sometimes in articles, I see stuff like American or British as adjective for the subject's origins linked, but I'm not sure if this is needed? People can usually understand these everyday words. Meetertound (talk) 21:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC) Meetertound (talk) 21:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Meetertound, MOS:OVERLINK agrees with you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:22, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Why does Mass killings under communist regimes preview text say "a bunch of bourgeois nonsense" when linked outside of Wikipedia? How can I fix this?Edit

 Rusentaja (talk) 21:40, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Because somebody had vandalised the Wikidata entity d:Q2235125. Thank you for pointing this out, Rusentaja: I have reverted it. --ColinFine (talk) 22:01, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

notation of birthplaceEdit

Some guy, calling himself "helper", not registered here, is changing the birthplace to "West-Germany" instead of Germany, claiming that at the time of birth, Germany was divided... i undid his change twice - but i fear, he will go on with it... so do i really have to change all the birthplaces in my articles to West or East-Germany if they were before the reunitation??? Sounds absurd to me, but i bow my head to your opinions... *grumpf* :-) --Gyanda (talk) 22:04, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes. There is a VERY LONG discussion on country of birth at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Country of birth, which sadly does not discuss West/East Germany as an example, but it appears that from Wikipedia articles West Germany and East Germany these were recognized officially as separate countries from 1949-1990. David notMD (talk) 22:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Gyanda The "clearest" guidance on this I know is Template:Infobox person, "Use the name of the birthplace at the time of birth" and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#Place_names. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your answer. Personally i don't find this helping to divide the birthplace in east and west, for me this only adds to a distinction, which we as a country try to overcome for years, but as it is the convention, I'll of course accept it. Thanks again, --Gyanda (talk) 11:58, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

My edits are not being retained. It seems to be available for few hours and after that reverts back to originalEdit

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

I am adding another section called Low Scores in between Professional Career and Amateur Wins. My edits are not being retained. It seems to be available for few hours and after that reverts back to original Ssmywiki (talk) 22:42, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

You edited the article one time and it was reverted by an editor who described it as trivia. The proper place to take this up is the Talk page of the article, or else the Talk page of that editor. Personally, I agree that a low score in any tournament is not useful information, unless perhaps setting a course record at a notable course. David notMD (talk) 22:52, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

How to repeat the same number for inline citations?Edit

Hello, if I want to cite the same source twice or more in an article, how do I get it to display [1] multiple times instead of [1],[2],[3] for the same source Mossypiglet (talk) 23:04, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

It's explained at WP:NAMEDREFS. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:21, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Speedy DeletionsEdit

In the past few months I've had many users calling for pages I made to have a speedy deletion just because they dont like a specific person or people.

Only one user actually discussed with me about the page he wanted to delete because of the" fame" rule and he was very polite in his discussion. Also that page wasnt part of the hatred I'm discussing. But that is telling.

However one of the pages I made kept getting deleted over and over without anyone replying why. And it's because some of them dont like the group of people.

I'm not sure what I can and what I cant create just because some of the members have some kind of hatred towards the subject.

Also when it comes to several pages I've added they've been erased. Again for the same reasons.

So is the deletion of the pages because of bias or not?

Also can the users be able to talk to the creator before they call for a deletion?

I did reply to some who had with no response.

This community needs to be better built.

Also specifically today with Team 10. User falsely claims I made the page to promote them when I just saw The Vlog Squad. had one so I made one for them too. What is with them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tropetroop29 (talkcontribs) 00:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

You have a practice of creating articles direct to mainspace rather than submitting to Articles for creation. And you have a track record of those articles either being flipped to draft status or else nominated for Speedy deletion if a new articles reviewer considered the content not worth trying to save. You put Team 10 Youtube in mainspace with only one blog as a reference and two hyperlinks in the body of the very skimpy article, so no surprise it was SD'd, and then draftified to Draft:Team 10 Youtube. Short answer: It's not the other editors, it's you. David notMD (talk) 01:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Tropetroop29: Please re-read Wikipedia:Notability and the specific notability guidelines that might apply to the topics you want to write about. Then re-read Wikipedia:Reliable sources, Wikipedia:Independent sources, and Wikipedia:Citing sources. Finally, re-read Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion especially the parts that match the reasons given by editors who put a "speedy deletion" template on the pages you create. Most of your questions should be answered in those documents. Come back here to ask whatever questions you have left.
You might also consider creating pages in "Draft"-space or as a "userspace draft" and submitting them for review through the "Articles for Creation" process. See Wikipedia:Drafts, Wikipedia:Userspace draft, and Wikipedia:Articles for creation for details. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:09, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

First off quit the disrespect. When I make the articles I immediately press create. I'm not sure how to do the administration process especially with the device I use to make the pages in the 1st place.

Now since you want to act like an egghead all of a sudden let me explain something to you.

They are supposed to respond when I talk to them. Period.

Learn to get to the point. Dont talk to me like this again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tropetroop29 (talkcontribs) 01:12, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

The point: You will continue to have a high failure rate until you understand the guidelines. If you don't want the type of advice davidwr offered, don't post here. David notMD (talk) 01:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Failure rate? Your life depending on Wiki is sad. Also this is supposed to be a friendly place so I'm going to tell you this nicely. I will talk wherever I want to.

You mean nothing to me after the way you talked to me just now. Dont know your problems or issues but I suggest you get it together.

Also a member has already helped me. So instead of me leaving you shut up and leave. Good riddance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tropetroop29 (talkcontribs) 02:14, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Tropetroop29. You have come here accusing other editors of bad faith, and then arguing with the people who have tried to help you, and asserting that Wikipedia works according to your rules rather than Wikipedia's. I get that you are annoyed, but it doesn't help anybody to vent that here. I suggest that you stop a moment to take a breath, and then read Civility, and Assume good faith. We welcome anybody to help us improve Wikipedia, but iIf you carry on the way you are going, you are likely to get blocked. --ColinFine (talk) 08:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
User has been formally warned to Assume Good Faith and to be less aggressive and over-assertive when collaborating with other volunteers. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Colin Faith and other guy. No they earn good faith period. You dont talk to me then this ain't no community. I have no choice but to assume that and on plus the responses they gave me was crap. So if you're mad please block me. I dont know you nor do I care. End of story. And that goes for anyone. So go right on ahead and leave. Also Civility needs to be worked on from you. Good Day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tropetroop29 (talkcontribs) 17:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

How I create a page for bussinessEdit

 Azhar ameen (talk) 00:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

If the business is one you are affiliated with in any way, the answer is "It's best if you don't, but if you insist, read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid editing disclosure first." Before any editor creates any article, they should read or at least skim over all of Wikipedia's polices and guidelines. It also is very helpful to read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Five pillars, although the last pillar, "Wikipedia has no firm rules," is a bit outdated, the paid disclosure-requirement is an example of a firm rule that is not negotiable. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:14, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Azhar ameen. Please remember that Wikipedia articles are not for the benefit of the subject of the article. If the subject gets some benefit from it, that is good fortune for them, but that is not Wikipedia's purpose. --ColinFine (talk) 08:44, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Citing the US Constitution?Edit

How should this be done? None of the citation templates on WP:Citing sources seem to fit. mossypiglet (talk) "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" — George Santayana 02:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi welcome to the Teahouse! May I ask, in what context? You could use quotations, but to answer your question: Use {{cite book}} as seen here. HeartGlow (talk) 02:40, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Mossypiglet: It's not ideal, but "cite web" with a stable, authoritative web site that is hosting a copy of it would work. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
This can also work. Such as maybe using the national archives. HeartGlow (talk) 02:40, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Mossypiglet. What are you citing the US Constitution as a source for? I'd image it would be treated as a WP:PRIMARY source in most cases and wouldn't be very helpful in citing anything other than a non-interpretative statement like Article xx of the US Constitution states yyyy." Morover, many of the Articles and Ammendments to the Constitution seem to have their own respective stand-alone articles which you could probably WP:WIKILINK to instead of actually citing.
Finally, I think you probably should reconsider your choice of a signature since it's rather confusing and adding "George Santayana" before the time stamp makes it seem as if your user name is "George Santayana". -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@HeartGlow30797: @Marchjuly: @Davidwr: First, thanks for the advice, everyone. I'm citing it for the assertion that the US president is commander-in-chief of the military (Article II, Section Two), which is very explicit in the Constitution--not like individual right to bear arms or anything contentious like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mossypiglet (talkcontribs) 02:53, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
I like the idea of using {{cite book}}, maybe something along these lines, but with a different quote and |at=:
{{tq|In the original Constitution of the United States, "Indians not taxed" were not counted for purposes of Congressional representation.<ref>{{cite book|at=Article II, section 1|title=Constitution of the United States of America|year=1787|quote=Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.|publisher=Constitutional Convention|location=Philadephia|url=https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript|accessdate=2020-09-22}}</ref>}}

{{reflist-talk}}<!-- note: reflist-talk breaks if indented-->

renders as
In the original Constitution of the United States, "Indians not taxed" were not counted for purposes of Congressional representation.[1]

References

  1. ^ Constitution of the United States of America. Philadephia: Constitutional Convention. 1787. Article II, section 1. Retrieved 2020-09-22. Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Davidwr: I like this too and I will probably use it because I don't think having too much citation info is a problem, but another thing to consider if you're interested is that if I remember correctly from high school in MLA and APA a lot of information is left out because the Constitution is considered so well-known it doesn't need to be identified in detail. mossypiglet (talk) 03:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
The citation stylebooks have probably changed since I was in high school. Use whatever citation style and level of detail is appropriate for your purposes. If it's for a Wikipedia encyclopedia article, Wikipedia:Citing sources is your best guide. If it's for a debate on a talk page, "The Constitution says" is good enough - as you said, it's so well-known you don't even have to reference it in many situations. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Mossypiglet, the U.S. Constitution is a 230 year old primary source that should not be used as a reference on Wikipedia, since there exists an abundance of extremely high quality published contemporary academic secondary sources available that explain the provisions of the Constitution. Wikipedia prioritizes citing the best of the secondary sources instead of the primary source. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:37, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you need to cite Article II, Section Two for something like this, when you can just add a Wikilink to Article II, Section 2. I don't think the actual text of the section can really be disputed though you might come across differing opinions on how it should be interpreted. It's interpretations of the Constitution that are going to require the secondary sources referred to above by Cullen328, not the actual wording of the document. To me this seems to be almost like a case of WP:BLUESKY. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Yes, the Constitution is primary and very old, but you're talking about it like it's a peasant's diary. It is still active as the supreme law of the US and it was written by very educated people for the time. You're right that I could cite a secondary source and this is absolutely necessary for much of the document but some things are so clearly stated (e.g. Congress makes laws), why not just cite the Constitution?

infobox template queryEdit

How to add links/citations in an infobox template Allin96 (talk) 05:07, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Allin96. You add links and citations to infoboxes pretty much the same way that you add links and citations to any Wikipedia article. There some minor variations that should be explained in the template documentation. Looking at the wikicode behind a successful implementation of a specific template can be enlightening. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

deletion discussionEdit

Where I how do I post my comments in a deletion discussion? Lausapwow (talk) 07:16, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Below the other editors. Please be advised that XfD's are not a vote. See also WP:AFDFORMAT. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Please review draft articleEdit

Hello admin, an article have in my draft space. And i have improved the article. So can anyone please review the article. And if the article is eligible thn please move it on to the article space ?? Waiting bror your reply. Thanks Myslfsbhijit (talk) 08:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Myslfsbhijit You have submitted it and it is pending review. As noted in your draft, "This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,571 pending submissions waiting for review." You will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 08:58, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello,331dot thanks for your reply. Can you please check once ??? Link - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Pathikrit_Basu

Myslfsbhijit As I've said, you will need to be patient. Do you have some sort of urgent need to get it moved into article space? 331dot (talk) 09:11, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

I predict Draft:Pathikrit Basu will be Declined again. You have done little after the first Declined. The references confirm he is a director of movies, but the ones I can read (English) are not about him, only mentioning his name in the process of describing the movies. There is no information in the text about his early life, education, career before becoming a director, being a director = all of which would require references. David notMD (talk) 09:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Links to categoriesEdit

how to add links to categories for a draft article. The category page already exists but when i try to link it using Insert link on my draft article, it says that category page doesn't exist. Here is the link for my draft article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Laborate_Pharmaceuticals_India_Limited Unable to link the categories,want them to get linked and blue'd xD Allin96 (talk) 08:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@Allin96: I have fixed it for you. <nowiki> Prevents anything from being interpreted by the parser, therefore, links dont work. The categories are still wrapped in {{Draft categories}} to prevent the draft from showing up in article space categories (which is not allowed). Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 09:10, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Pending draft submissionsEdit

Hey guys. I've had 3 draft submissions pending for several weeks at Draft:Joseph Hayat, Draft:Justin Picard and Draft:Cynthia Umezulike, and the backlog only seems to be growing with each passing week. If there's any willing reviewers who'd take the time to have a look, that would be appreciated. Davykamanzitalkcontribsalter ego 09:37, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Presumably you wish to speed up the moment you get paid? Most of us here are volunteers, please don't try to game the system for your own financial gain. Theroadislong (talk) 09:45, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
There's a queue and a backlog. Also, WP:NODEADLINE applies, which overrides you and your clients' desire to get some spam on here. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Surprised at result of page protection requestEdit

Is this normal? I’ve been trying to keep a hoax out of the Panela article, ongoing (well before my involvement) since June 2016. I am only the latest in a long, long line of (registered) editors reverting this vandalism.

The result of my request -

Pending changes: Persistent vandalism, which inserts exact same hoax-like text and mislabelled gallery image. Identical edit has occurred since at least June 2016 from various IPs - some of which have been blocked in past, (e.g.[1], [2]) for persistently inserting and then un-reverting this unsourced nonsense, and some not, (e.g. [3], [4]).
Despite trying to quickly revert the edit over last week or two, as many others have done in the recent past, it is soon replaced. As I am also an IP user, I do not want to be seen to be a disruptive editor, but nor do I want this unsourced, silly misinformation disseminated through WP. 122.105.187.37 (talk) 03:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 6 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 07:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

was: a more restrictive – and possibly less effective - level of protection was applied, without explanation; and my editing has been characterised as ”edit-warring”, despite all my caution, talk page comment, and over-explaining eggshell-walking.

Wonderful treatment of newcomers! I feel so welcomed. Why didn't I barge in and throw my weight around as I see others do on WP, instead of going to the trouble of politely pussy-footing around? I got a slap in face just the same!

I am really surprised at how badly I feel, but I am completely gutted: No good deed goes unpunished!

What did I do wrong?

}} 122.105.187.37 (talk) 10:04, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

The spurious Australia mention is out, and the article is semi-protected. I see no mention on your Talk page about you being accused of edit-warring. I'd count that as success. David notMD (talk) 10:19, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Please see above link, also here again: [2]. It's not on my talk page, it's on the edit summary. 122.105.187.37 (talk) 10:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
i.e."edit warring by IPs without discussion" 122.105.187.37 (talk) 10:27, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @122.105.187.37 You did just the right thing, thank you. I have left an 'only warning' for the other IP editor. As David says, nobody left you any notice at all - the only thing I see is an edit summary explaining why the page on Panela was being 'page protected' for 6 months. It might have been slightly clumsily-worded, but it was not a criticism aimed at your editing, just an overall justification of why pp was being introduced. I don't think you needed to have interpreted it as criticism of your editing in any way at all - sorry if you think it did. You also did the right thing in leaving a note on the article talk page - something you can refer back to if it ever happens again. I'm sure you are aware that we don't block editors for 'edit warring' if they are reverting vandalism - this one was a bit more subtle, and it was hard for me to see which of two similar looking IPs were causing the problem, and which was restoring damage. It makes it easier when editors are registered, though there's no obligation on anyone to do so. Just appreciate that we do see a lot of edit-warring IPs, even if this wasn't the case here. (I've added the page to my watchlist, too) Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:09, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Help with tablesEdit

Tables are scary, they demand a lot of wikicodes and stuff.

But tables on South Asia has quite some redudancies that needs cleaning up. Is there someone who can help with tables (like shifting demographic data from multiple existing tables to one existing table or GDP data from multiple existing tables to one existing table? At the end of the cleanup, the number tables would remain the same, but the same data will not be repeated over many tables on the same article.

Anyone there who can volunteer? Aditya(talkcontribs) 10:58, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@Aditya Kabir: I agree with you - tables can be scary, and that article certainly has a shed load of them. You might have some success if you were to identify the issues on the talk page of the article itself, or even at Wikipedia:WikiProject South Asia. Should you decide to try to sort it out yourself, I would recommend copying the relevant source code to your sandbox and experimenting with them there, rather than messing up the live articles. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: I love the sandbox idea. Did not raise it on the article talk because most of the table makers who worked on the article seem to be inactive these days. But I certainly can give it a try.Already trembling in fear at the prospect... brrr. Aditya(talkcontribs) 11:48, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Aditya Kabir: You might also want to use the visual editor to edit tables. Like many, I find the visual editor obnoxious and prefer the wikicode text editor, but I believe it is clearly superior in that one aspect (editing tables). One method (possibly not the simplest) to use it temporarily is to modify the URL by hand to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foo&veaction=edit (note the veaction parameter). TigraanClick here to contact me 12:44, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Aditya Kabir: Yes, I do agree with Tigraan - it's one of the few times that our not very pleasant Visual Editor does actually make it easier to edit tables than Source Editor. I would point out that there are over 400 editors currently watching that page, with over 3,000 views per day. I still advise posting a note on the talk page, explaining your concerns and what you would hope to do. That way, you might find there are good reasons not to merge them (so that might save you a job!), but you might also find other willing helpers with table experience 'come out of the woodwork' to help, or do all the work for you! You would be operating within acceptable procedure if you were to temporarily copy one or more sections - or the entire article to your sandbox - to work on the tables there. But do please leave an edit summary saying something like 'Temporarily copying contents from South Asia page to work on tables - acknowledging the authors, listed in that page's View History' Nick Moyes (talk) 13:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes:@Tigraan: Let me just quickly check if I got it right:
  1. Write my intentions on the article talk and wait.
  2. If no objection, then start working on the sandbox.
  3. Copy table elements to sandbox for the work (though I think edit summaries will not be needed, as copying would not entail an edit to the article)
  4. Do this in the Visual Editor.
Did I miss something? Aditya(talkcontribs) 16:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@Aditya Kabir: That sounds about right. You don't have to wait for feedback - you could start straight away, but waiting seems sensible (depending what exactly it is you plan to merge, or if you're seeking help from others). No, you really should use an edit summary when pasting a lot of text from an article to your sandbox, purely so there's attribution given to the editors who created that content in the first place. Whilst someone like me is unlikely to be bothered, that's the right thing to do, as explained at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. I'd also suggest making lots of smaller edits, rather than one big one, when working on tables. That way, if you go wrong, you can revert to an earlier, functioning version with less loss of effort on your part. If you do mess up in your sandbox, you could always pop back here to ask for further help with specific problems. (I'm guessing that few of us here are likely to want to work on the entire reworking of the tables for you, but can help and guide you if you garble something up.) Nick Moyes (talk) 16:26, 23 September 2020 (UTC)    
@Nick Moyes: Errr... I really did hope to find someone to lend a hand, like how people volunteer to copy edit and stuff.   But, of course, guidance and counsel may get the work done too. Thanks for the guidance... and the encouragement. Also thanks for explaining the edit summary. For some reason I thought it was about ES at the article, not at the sandbox. Now I get it. Allow me to work along the advise, and report back when needed. Hopefully I can get this done.  Y Tea anyone?I make better tea than Wikitables, I promise. Aditya(talkcontribs) 16:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

ConcernsEdit

Dear Sirs,

I read through your write up on C. W. Thamotharampillai (which is usually spelled in English as "Damodaran Pillai").

Please let me know who is the person/volunteer who wrote this write up for there is a factual historical error in this write up as it states that both U.V. Saminatha Iyer (a Tamil speaking brahmana) and C.W. Thamotharampillai published the Tolkappiyam! From my reading of the history surrounding the publishing of the Tolkappiyam, this is wholly incorrect as it was C.W. Thamotharampillai alone who single-handedly published the Tolkappiyam!

Please therefore correct this factual error as soon as possible. AndI would be interested to know whether the person/volunteer who wrote this write up with its factual historical error is himself a brahmana!

From: Mr. Sundara-M, Krishnan, Hong Kong/Singapore 202.85.38.153 (talk) 11:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks like many people have contributed to that article on C. W. Thamotharampillai over the years, details of which you can see here by clicking the 'View History' tab. It looks like the main contributor has been User:Kanags, and I am sure they would welcome your concerns and suggestions for change. But, rather than have a conversation about it here at the Teahouse, might I respectfully invite you to repost your concerns on the actual article's own talk page, where everyone interested in the subject will be able to see it and respond to it? You can find it at Talk:C. W. Thamotharampillai. When you do so, please remember to include full details of any reference work you are referring to, as we do not make changes based on personal opinion, but we do welcome citing published scholarly works which have written about that subject. Kind regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
If you're here at the Teahouse you are presumably a Wikipedia editor yourself, so what is to stop you correcting the error yourself? The relevant page doesn't seem to have been edited since November 2018. If you go through the history you can probably work who introduced the error that you want corrected. Athel cb (talk) 13:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

How long should it take for a new page to be published?Edit

Hello

I have two questions, if I may:

How do I amend the title of a draft piece and how long should it take to get reviewed/published? The article is "Draft:Marshal Bailey OBE" but it should read Marshall Bailey OBE with two ls. I can't see how to amend this.

Thanks for your help in advance.

 WriterWriting (talk) 12:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

WriterWriting, I have made some minor edits to your draft and submitted it for review; this may take several months. Another editor had already corrected the spelling of its title. Maproom (talk) 12:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Help on Draft ArticleEdit

Anyone wanna help me finishing this draft article? Draft:List of Broadway productions by year. The source I use is [3]. HeartGlow (talk) 12:44, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Help on DraftEdit

Hello, does anyone know how I could confirm and publish a draft page I am working on? Draft:ICEY_ARTS I have more material to add but I would like to do it afterwards, in case that the draft page is not verified by Wikipedia. PAndreas 10 (talk) 14:18, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

I have added a template marking your draft as part of the Articles for Creation project. This includes a blue "Submit" button. When you think the draft is ready, you can click the submit button, and it will be added to a group waiting for review. In time a reviewer will look at the draft, and either approve it, and move it to the article main space, or decline it, giving reasons why it is not yet ready, and which will guide you to improve and try again. Unfortunately, there are over 3,000 drafts awaiting review. Reviewers pick whichever they please, so a draft may be reviewed in a few days, or may wait for two months or more for a review. It is OK to continue to work o a draft while it is waiting, or to start another. Or to edit existing articles, which is often a good idea.
I see that your draft is about an organization. Any organization, to have an article about it on Wikipedia, must be notable and must normally pass our guideline for the notability of organizations. Please read those pages, and Your First Article, Wikipedia's Golden Rule, and Referencing for Beginners.
I can tell you that this draft would not be approved if it were submitted in its current state. Of the four cited sources, none are independent. An article, to demonstrate the notability of its topic, must include several citations to independent published reliable sources, each of which includes significant coverage of the topic. An organization's own web site is never independent of that organization, neither is its social media such as linkedin or facebook, neither are the sites of affiliated organizations. Online fora, discussion groups, open wikis, or other sources of user-generated content are generally not considered reliable. Neither are personal web sites, fan sites, or the like. Please read the various pages I have linked to in this message.
I hope that is helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:03, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Permission to edit "Fuck"Edit

I think the following would be useful, particularly to US readers as a section to the article.

Use in Collegiate and Professional Athletics:

Frequently, college and professional athletes can be observed in person and on television using the work as an expiative after a bad turn of events such as an error by themselves, a teammate or simply an unfortunate turn of events in a game. Although rarely heard, the athlete can be seen in-person or on television clearly mouthing the word. E.g., during Sunday's (September 20, 2020) game against the New Orleans Saints, future Hall of Fame quarterback Tom Brady now playing for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, can be seen on national television sitting on the bench after fumbling a handoff to his running back resulting in a recovery of the ball by the Saints mouthing a single word, "FUCK!". [cite]

Heisman Trophy winner and first overall pick in the [year] NFL draft by the Tampa Bay Buccaneers . . . [cite]

Hall of fame catcher . . , as noted, is attributed the creation of the word "F-bomb." [cite] John D. Maher (talk) 14:46, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

John D. Maher Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The best place to make this suggestion is on the article talk page, Talk:Fuck. You can make it as a formal edit request(click for instructions), but I'm sure it will be seen even if you don't. 331dot (talk) 15:10, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Although this is a worldwide Wikipedia, for all English-language speaking people, not just the US. Very specific, US-centric examples are unlikely to be supported, whereas general examples that people throughout the world would understand are preferred. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:16, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
You've already said exactly the same thing in another post just above, and you've now made your proposal at Talk:Fuck. And I have placed my reasons there why I think it is a bad proposal, and others are free to comment in order to gain a consensus one way or the other. Perhaps then it will be time to DROPTHESTICK (Remember, if you want to cite a source to support any proposal, you do actually need to cite a source.) Nick Moyes (talk) 20:35, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Sandra Day O'Connor citationEdit

Sandra Day O'Connor citation still shows her living 24.90.80.53 (talk) 16:46, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

I believe that Sandra Day O'Connor is retired, not dead. RudolfRed (talk) 17:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Correct. She is retired from public life due to an Alzheimer's diagnosis. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:30, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

NotificationsEdit

I've made a couple of sections and replied to a couple sections on the talk pages of Wikipedia sites but I only get a notification of a reply if they mention my username. Is there a way to get a notification if someone replies on the section I made/replies to the reply I made? It would be more convenient and I wouldn't have to check every now and then. YouGottaChill (talk) 17:43, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@YouGottaChill: you'll only be alerted if you are tagged, or if the edit is on your talk page. You could add the talk pages to your watch list and check then from time to time. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:07, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
@YouGottaChill: At the top of each article/talkpage or user/talkpage, there is a little star icon. Press it, and it turns blue. This adds them to your Watchlist. From then on, whenever you log onto WP, you can press "Watchlist" at the top of your screen, and see if any pages you are watching have new edits. See WP:W, for more info. Hope this helps. Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 21:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

changing out a picture : I wish to change out my father's picture: James B Donovan/ current one is unflatteringEdit

please tell me how to change out my father's picture. James.B Donovan - the current one is quite unflattering! I am struggling with this- and want to do asap.- daughter: Mary Ellen Donovan Fuller Brooklyn blonde (talk) 17:45, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: James B. Donovan
Hello, Brooklyn blonde and welcome to the Teahouse. File:James B. Donovan.jpg is currently used under fair use as a "unique historic image" which makes it a bit harder to justify a replacement. Would your suggested replacement be under a free license? What would the source be?
In any case, the first step would be to upload the suggested replacement. Use the commons upload wizard if the image is freely licensed or is in the public domain. Note that you must indicate who is the copyright holder and show that the holder has licensed it under a compatible free license, or if the image is PD indicate why it is, as most images from the 1940s or 1950s will not be PD. Once the image is uploaded, i advise posting at Talk:James B. Donovan and suggesting the replacement, as well as why the new image is better. Note that the value to the readers will matter more than whether the image is flattering or not -- we really don't care if an accurate image is unflattering. The question is, will a new image better help readers understand who Donovan was and what he looked like? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello Brooklyn blonde. Because your father was a U.S. military officer and a high ranking U.S. government official, it is very likely that many photos of him were taken by federal government photographers as part of their employment. Any such photo is in the public domain and can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and used in his biography. You will need evidence of the origin of the photo. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:28, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

HOW DO I RESPOND?? BRAND BRAND NEW NEW HEREEdit

Got a message - "Welcome - I'll help you get started. Respond on my talk page."

Sounds great. What do I do?????

 Could I BE any newer at this?

LarryLarry Westenberg (talk) 18:19, 23 September 2020 (UTC) Larry Westenberg (talk) 18:19, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@Larry Westenberg: hello Larry, and Welcome to Wikipedia. I cannot exactly infer if this refers to Djwal Khul or Lucis Trust. Howewer, please be informed that as a neutral encyclopedia, we deal with what can be verfied instead of what somebody considers the truth. (And please dont write in all capital letters. Its considered shouting and will not help you. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:57, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Victor - thank you. No caps - understood. Neutral. Understood. I am HAPPY to, HONORED to learn and follow the guidelines strictly. I haven't the faintest clue how to communicate in this forum of if anybody can see what I am writing. I am THAT new. Does this work to type where I am typing? Larry Westenberg (talk) 20:37, 23 September 2020 (UTC) Here is how LOW LEVEL what I am asking really is: 1.) This is the Tea Bar. I've read the purpose and description. I've read a lot of information. I need a "stick in the ground" for the communications system and process. 2.) This message shows text displayed as a "Subject" as in an email - where I posted in all caps. However, it says, "Edit Summary." This message is not regarding a specific post. It is me diving in and going, "What the heck?" 3.) Please bear with me as I wander around if I have walked into the wrong department with my questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larry Westenberg (talkcontribs) 20:47, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Chris Tompkins edits being deletedEdit

The article that I'm asking a question about is Chris Tompkins. I am wondering why my edits were deleted and how I can recover them. I did not include an edit summary, so I also need to figure out how to rectify that. Thanks! 64.139.83.109 (talk) 18:20, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the teahouse! Why did you remove these sentences and references on Chris Tompkins to begin with? HeartGlow (talk) 18:29, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I edited his profile because I work for his family and his wife wanted to change some information to be more accurate.

Hello, IP user. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which contains articles which summarise what reliably-published independent sources say about a subject. It has little interest in what the subject, or their associates want the article to say.
What you need to do is:
  1. Read about paid editing, and make the mandatory declaration described there.
  2. Read about ownership of articles.
  3. Any changes that you or your employers would like made to the article, you should submit as an edit request on the talk page of the article. Be as specific as you can (eg 'Add xxxx at the end of the paragraph yyyy', or 'Remove sentence zzz'), and cite a reliably published sources - preferably one wholly independent of Tompkins - for any information you wish to add.
An uninvolved editor will consider your suggestion as decide whether and how it is appropriate to apply it. --ColinFine (talk)

OvercategorizationEdit

What exactly is the limit for categorizing films and TV? If something is a plot element in a film but not exactly the central theme, would a related category still be appropriate? For example, let's say a movie features two LGBT characters as one of the supporting roles (e.g. main antagonist) but the movie itself isn't centered around LGBT - would an LGBT-related category be considered overcategorizing the page? Meetertound (talk) 19:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

TwinkleEdit

What is Twinkle? Can I use it on my mobile? I use Wikipedia on my Android browser. I tried to use Twinkle on my phone, but failed. Userths (talk) 20:49, 23 September 2020 (UTC)