Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1122

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1115

←

Archive 1120

What would make a deletion request "uncontroversial"?; and what's the appropriate mechanism to deal with this questionable article?

Hi Wiki Teahouse,

I have identified a page which severely misrepresents some ideas that fall within my area of expertise (I'm doing my honours thesis in a closely-related area) and I am wondering what the appropriate avenue would be for me to remedy the situation.

I had previously already submitted a WP:PROD for the page, but somebody politely contested and reverted my proposed deletion on what I understand to be procedural grounds (?), advising that this is something that needs to be decided by WP:AFD consensus instead.

The page in question is Object theory, the revision containing my WP:PROD (and the reason it was contested) is here, and my proposed deletion reason was as follows:

The page is based around a serious misunderstanding of the sole cited source. In Stephen Kleene's book on metamathematics, he describes how one theory may be interpreted inside of another, in which case we may refer to the containing theory as the meta-theory, and the contained theory as the object theory. The "object theory" here could be any theory (in the sense of model theory). There is no particular mathematical theory called "Object theory", and instead Kleene is merely using the term "object" here in the sense of Object language.

So the first thing I wanted to ask Teahouse about is that I'm not quite sure what was wrong with my WP:PROD. The person who contested the deletion didn't necessarily disagree with my deletion reason at all but seemed to be suggesting that it wasn't appropriate for me to claim the page as an uncontroversial deletion candidate:

the proposer may or may not be correct, but that is something that needs to be decided by consensus at WP:AFD rather than it being claimed that this is an uncontroversial deletion candidate, as required for the WP:PROD procedure

Is there a guideline for how I should correctly interpret what "controversial" means in this case? (I'm not sure if the person who contested was just assuming that there might be other people out there who could hypothetically disagree, or whether there is something about the nature of the request I was making that is categorically to be considered controversial?)

The second thing that I wanted to ask you about is that I started considering that perhaps deletion is the wrong mechanism to be pursuing entirely and that I should instead be looking to turn the page into a redirect for Object language. I was reading the guidelines for WP:MERGE and it is said that no permission is required to do a merge if I think it is uncontroversial, but this again circles back to the above issue with how I'm not sure why my WP:PROP was controversial. I could start a discussion to attempt a WP:MERGE, but I'm not sure if this is the right thing to be doing if I will not in practice actually be keeping essentially any content from the Object theory page and will just be turning it into a redirect - would this be misuse of the WP:MERGE feature? The two pages are indeed just talking about exactly the same thing (although one is just a very confused misunderstanding of the other), so I'm not sure whether this is appropriate or not.

Would the appropriate mechanism be for me to create a WP:AFD for the page and then separately make the page a redirect after deletion occurs, or to create a merger proposal? (Or just attempt a WP:MERGE directly without permission on the grounds that it seems uncontroversial to me? - although this seems unwise given that somebody contested my deletion for very similar reasons.) Or something else entirely?

Thanks in advance for your help! (Sorry for the long question/s!) Jackcrawf3 (talk) 03:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jackcrawf3. The policy is described at Wikipedia:Proposed deletion. You thought that the deletion would be uncontroversial but another editor acting in apparent good faith disagreed. The presumption that deletion was uncontroversial evaporated forever at that moment. Articles for Deletion is your only option now. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:37, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Or a merge. But the article has been around since 2005, & has been edited by a number of people, so I wonder if you are correct. Johnbod (talk) 03:45, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jackcrawf3. Generally, deletion of an article is considered to be the last resort and only in cases where fixing the article is not a realistic possibility. We are encouraged as editors to try and WP:PRESERVE content whenever and as much as possible, partly out of deference to those who previously edited the article before us but also because Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project in which improvements are typically made in bits and pieces over time. Unilaterally blanking a page so as to completely rewrite it can often lead to problems even when one's intentions are the best. If you have specialized knowledge about the subject matter and no what's wrong with an article, then you can try and be WP:BOLD and fix things yourself. Please understand though that not everyone may agree with your assessment of the situation; so, sometimes it can be better to be WP:CAUTIOUS and discuss things first on the article's talk page. You might also want to take a look at WP:EXPERT for some general guidance as well. Anyone who wants to can essentially edit Wikipedia at anytime and of course content experts are most welcome to help improve things as well; being a content expert, however, doesn't grant an editor any special privileges when it comes to relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and also does mean that everyone is going to necessarily be willing to step aside and stay out of one's way. Despite everything they may know about a particular subject, sometimes content experts know very little about how Wikipedia works and that's where they might find themselves having a bit of trouble. Try and remember this when dealing with others because if your position is basically nothing more than "I'm an expert on the topic and thus people should give my position more weight", the chances you receiving an unfavorable response go way up. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:44, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

A couple of citation questions

1. Is it considered acceptable to report the current number of members of a facebook group? Or must I reference a reliable source reporting a somewhat out-of-date number? (Seems like the former should be obvious, but previous editors of the page I'm working on did the latter.)

2. A section entitled "contents" summarizes the contents of a (wildly popular, contested, and influential) self-published article. Must it cite reliable secondary sources that summarize its contents, or may the editor summarize the self-published article? (same situation as #1.)

Thanks! Artemisia-californica (talk) 05:48, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Artemisia-californica Welcome to the Teahouse, and good questions. I'll give you my opinion. I'm guessing this is about Deep Adaptation.

1. Go with the out-of-date "nearly 10,000 members as of March 2020". Any numbers primary sourced to FB is out of WP:PROPORTION (and possibly a bit WP:PROMO).

2. Tricky. We have something called MOS:PLOTSOURCE, which doesn't really apply since that's about fiction. Secondary sources would be my preference, but the devil is in the details. The "risk" is that you (being human) put emphasis on the bits you think important. Use your best judgement, be WP:BOLD and see what happens. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:25, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Why the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia always block me while I never say any bad things and include reliable sources

Hello. I would like to plead you for making me easy.

Although I changed to a new account named Malay833, in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia, it always blocked me? Why it always block me? I don't understand Ukrainian completely. I never mean to say anything bad and I indeed will bring reliable sources. Why the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia always block me from editing new pages? Discuss with the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia not to block me and to allow me editing new pages. I cannot understand why the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia blocked me although I changed my account to be much better by not saying anything bad and I do include reliable sources.

Thank you. Malay833 (talk) 08:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Is it impossible to create new pages relating to people and things with bringing reliable sources

Hello. Do you think it's wrong for me to edit new pages about different things until I never say any bad things and bring reliable sources. I never say any bad thing, and the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia always blocked me with my new account, as I never say anything bad and I indeed bring reliable sources. In fact, when I go to the Ukrainian part, I don't understand Ukrainian completely, I'm very new and I'm from Malaysia. I'm just a learner of that for 2 years since 2019. Can you please help me to deal and discuss with the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia to unblock me so that I can create many new pages with bringing reliable sources and not saying anything bad?

Thank you. Malay833 (talk) 09:02, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Malay833: This is English Wikipedia, and we're pretty much totally independent from Ukrainian Wikipedia, so we can't do much to help you get unblocked there. The main advice is to speak to the issue that led to the block and own anything you did; see WP:Guide to appealing blocks for more. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 09:14, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Mykola7, care to comment? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:18, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi ~~Mykola7~~ Malay833. It's not clear why you wish to contribute to the Ukrainian wikipedia if you "don't understand Ukrainian completely". I'm sure that they will have a policy similar to the one on Englidh Wikipedia that competence is required. I assume that your native language is Malay, so why don't you first become familiar with editing on the Malayan-language version of Wikipedia, where I'm sure your efforts would be valued? As you probably know, its Main page is at ms:Laman_Utama. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:25, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Malay833:, Mykola7. Apologies, wrong person pinged. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:31, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

In fact, I'm more developing based on other languages than Malay, my native language. My mind is more based overseas. So that's why I'm more to edit in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malay833 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Malay833 aka 833AdamAsrul aka Adamdaniel864 was blocked for violating WP:SOCK. Ckeckuser decision. The user Adamdaniel864 was restricted from being able to create new pages for constant unread machine translation. --Mykola7 (talk) 09:45, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Malay833: you were blocked at Ukrainian Wikipedia because you have abused multiple accounts. You should never create a new account when your previous account has been blocked. That is also true at English Wikipedia. Blocks apply to you, the person, not to the user login. Because User:Adamdaniel864 has been blocked, you are not allowed to edit English Wikipedia. (Nor are you allowed to edit Croatian Wikipedia, since another account of yours, User:Слов'янська, has been blocked there.) --bonadea contributions talk 09:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

In fact, I have to change my own account to make sure that the pages that I created has its own reliable sources and no bad things. I never mean to say or do anything that is bad. I'm just creating new pages in Wikipedia that is related to something outside Wikipedia with bringing its reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malay833 (talk • contribs) 10:20, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Malay833: Nobody thinks that you mean to say or do anything bad. But you need to understand that when an account is blocked, the person who had that account is not allowed to create a new one. That is true for everybody, not just you. --bonadea contributions talk 10:38, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

If you keep creating new accounts, they will be blocked too. If you want to be unblocked on en-WP, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. If you want to be unblocked on other WP:s, follow their instructions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:39, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution

Someone has reverted my edits here. How do I get someone to add it back or get Admin help for its addition?-- Baamiyaan2 (talk) 09:55, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

What are the dispute resolution mechanisms here?--Baamiyaan2 (talk) 10:09, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Baamiyaan2: Your post is a little misleading – nobody has reverted your talk page posts, which you linked to above. Your edits to the article were reverted. The situation is as follows: you made an edit request on the article talk page on 18 August, which generated a fairly long discussion. The consensus in the discussion was that your suggested edit was not supported by the source you provided, and so the content was not added. You then asked about it here at the Teahouse, here and here. Today, you added text to the lede, saying "See talk page discussion", and another editor (very properly) reverted it, with a comment that the talk page discussion did not show any consensus for adding the claim, especially not in the article lede. It looks like there is still ongoing discussion on the article talk page. Admins are not allowed to use their special admin tools in content disputes. --bonadea contributions talk 10:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea:, sorry I meant to say that I have linked to a discussion on the talk page about a reversion. Now the editor who reverted the sentences feels that one sentence is fine and another believes that if we use the words, "According to......" everything is fine, so what is to be done next, a Request for Comments?--Baamiyaan2 (talk) 11:14, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

"Not an article" deleted. Can I have that removed from my page history?

Hello,

I was making a list of article ideas in my draft space a few days ago and somehow managed to start an empty article. I am not a new editor. It was quickly noticed and put up for deletion/deleted and I was notified what had happened. I responded to the editor on my talk page, that this non-article was just an error on my part working in my draftspace. I was not trying to create a new article. My question: I have created 221 new articles to date with 0 deletions ( proud of the 0 deletions) and I see this deleted article/clerical error as a weird anomaly. Is there a way that I can remove "Marlow Warlord grave" from my page history or make a request to have that done? Or will this be my permanent page history? thx MauraWen (talk) 13:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC) MauraWen (talk) 13:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

This is permanently in your contributions (not page history). Your contributions cannot be straight up deleted. The closest thing to deleting contributions is having the contents of them hidden by an Oversighter, but even then they aren't truly deleted. Deleting contributions can screw up some stuff related to the history of things which is why we don't do that. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:25, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@MauraWen: Forgot to ping [[User:@MauraWen:|Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor]] (talk) 13:27, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: Ok, I understand. thx MauraWen (talk) 13:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: No problem! If you're listing all the stuff you have done on your user page, you could probably just add a category for "accidents" and list it there. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:31, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: Good idea! That will teach me not to edit when I am tired! MauraWen (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

~~I just realized I managed to ping myself in my own comment~~ @MauraWen: Ya that's always a good idea. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox content ready but can't search it in wikipedia page

Hi Wiki experts,

I prepared a wikipage about ISCN (International Standard Content Number) in my sandbox and would like to publish it so more people can find out the info. however, trying different way to publish (including submission for draft review) but still can't make it happen. Can anyone help further here?

many thanks!

Exodus21 Exodus21HK (talk) 07:26, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Exodus21HK, hello! As you can see at Draft:International Standard Content Number, your submission was declined. See WP:GNG for what is demanded for a stand-alone article and WP:TUTORIAL/WP:REFBEGIN on how to reference properly, this is essential. Wikipedia:WikiProject Cryptocurrency could be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

You had it nearer to being right at User:Exodus21HK/sandbox, but then you seem to have copied the rendering of it to the draft article and thus lost some of the syntax and content. Instead of the browser's rendering of the page, you need to copy the wikitext, (or move the page to draft namespace rather than copying). You do need to provide references to published independent reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:06, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

I see that you have now made further updates to your sandbox, but apparently still not read WP:REFBEGIN. You need to do that before trying to submit the draft for review. And, in particular, you need to find reliable sources independent of the company. If there are no such independent sources, there is no point in wasting further time on the draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:49, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Template for Sources

I came across a template on a talk page a while back and I can't remember what it's called. It allowed people to list potentially useful sources at the top of the talk page. Does anyone know which template it is? TipsyElephant (talk) 13:53, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: See {{Refideas}}. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:25, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Suggestbot no longer giving new suggestions after archived

Hello! So I started using suggestbot, and then I started archiving my talk page and I'm not sure if Suggestbot is working properly after being archived. Can anyone take a look and make sure it's working and if not help me fix it? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:52, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Your problem was that you had placed the {{User:SuggestBot/config}} template within one of the threads on your user talkpage, so when that thread was archived & deleted from the page, you no longer had the SuggestBot set up for your page. Put the configuration string at the top of your page before the first of the talk threads. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:19, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah ok thanks! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 14:38, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Museum Images

Some videogame articles contain copyrighted images (like for example the Minecraft article that has this image), all this under "fair use", the same could be done for museum photographs?, in this case the official website of the Kenya National Museums page contains photos of the museum buildings, this could be considered as fair use? Seb { 💬 Talk + 📝 Edits } 00:42, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JSeb05. Please read the policy language about use of non-free images which is enforced strictly. I cannot imagine how the photos you describe would be acceptable. Any Wikipedia editor in Kenya could take freely licensed photos of those buildings. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi JSeb05. There's a difference between fair use and non-free content when it comes to using images on Wikipedia; so, it's important to understand that the two are not exactly the same as explained here and here, and avoid mixing them up whenever possible. Non-free content needs to satisfy Wikipedia's non-free content use policy for it to be considered OK to use, and there are ten criteria which need to be met for each use of non-free content. Whether photos appearing on the museum's website can be uploaded and used largely depends on whether those photos would satisfy non-free content use criterion #1. Since there appears to be freedom of panorama for architectural works such as buildings in Kenya under Kenyan copyright law, then (as Cullen328 points out above) pretty much anyone could take a photo of the museum's buildings and uploaded it under a free license that Wikipedia accepts; therefore, it would really be hard to try and justify uploading and using copyrighted images taken by others unless you can get their WP:CONSENT to do so. If you're looking for more recent photos of the museum but are unable to take any yourself, maybe try asking for help at Wikipedia:WikiProject Kenya. Perhaps one of the members of that WikiProject lives close to the museum and can take some photos of its bulidings. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:20, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328 and Marchjuly: I think the problem is that the Kenya portal is a bit inactive and the talk page mentions about this (Other portals related to Kenya such as the Nairobi and Mombasa portals have been removed for being inactive). In the talk page of the Malindi museum there is a template that says "It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.", I think maybe I should include this template in the pages of other regional museums in Kenya, maybe it will work, anyway thanks for telling me and explaining me the difference between non-free content and fair use. -Seb { 💬 Talk + 📝 Edits } 15:13, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Eric Clapton article

The article had outdated representations of Claptons political views. I wrote a couple of paragraphs on his updated views which he has presented numerous times in interviews about his anti-brexit views and his embracing of immigrants.

Somebody has deleted most of this, and replaced it with a curt summary which suggests otherwise, using terminology such as he 'insists' he is pro immigration, undermining Claptons changed views.

Can this deceitful piece of editing be removed please and my original edit which is more accurate, detailed and objective, be returned?

Many thanks MangoTree VeMangoTree (talk) 21:24, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

VeMangoTree, you made one edit, a month ago. On the face of it, it seems a reasonable edit. ("On the face of it", because it cites a Youtube video that I haven't bothered to look at.) However, it does seem rather wordy for its purpose; and Youtube links are automatically suspect unless carefully described. You don't seem to have attempted to discuss, on Talk:Eric Clapton, the fate of your edit. That's where you should go. If the current text seems deceitful, then say so there, giving your reasons (and remaining polite). -- Hoary (talk) 21:46, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

@VeMangoTree: Welcome to the Teahouse! Instead of citing a YouTube video of a radio interview, maybe you can find a secondary reliable source that reports what Clapton said in the interview. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:43, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

User:VeMangoTree - It is not helpful to describe another editor's contribution as a "deceitful piece of editing" (even if you believe it is a deceitful piece of editing). When I look through the Teahouse, questions that insult the work of other editors stand out for me, and not in a favorable way. My advice is to tone down your complaint, and then I will give the same advice as User:Hoary, to discuss on the article talk page. Assume good faith, such as that editors are not trying to deceive. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:39, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

What is the criteria of accepting articles?

What is the criteria of accepting articles? Nandkoli (talk) 16:02, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

I can see that the reasons were well-elaborated already in the rejection statements.

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

If you click on those links, you can see the specific ways your article draft does not qualify. Feel free to review those and try again. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 16:22, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Notable enough?

I want to create a wiki page for singer/songwriter Tom Fairnie. Can anyone tell me if he’s “notable” enough for inclusion based on these links please?

https://www.eastlothiancourier.com/news/18514008.singer-releases-new-album-following-trip-lifetime-usa/

http://www.haddstock.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Tom-Fairnie-Band-Exclusive-Making-of-Lightning-In-The-Dark.pdf

https://hudba.proglas.cz/noklasik/folk/tom-fairnie-skotsky-pisnickar-hraje-americanu/

m.sn-online.de/amp/news/Schaumburg/Sachsenhagen/Woelpinghausen/Tom-Fairnie-bringt-Mel1425 (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

No I'm not going to look at all of those, and I doubt that anyone else will, sorry. (Life's too short.) Please indicate which among this list are the best three; then someone here will look at those three. -- Hoary (talk) 12:07, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Without even clicking the links, I can predict that some of those will fail at least one of the criteria at WP:GNG: darrensmusicblog.com and timepastandtimepassing.wordpress.com are likely to be blogs written by some random guy/gal and therefore not considered "reliable"; localbarsfinder.com or edinburghfestival.list.co.uk sound like listings of stuff (bars or Edinburgh festival events) that are never considered "significant coverage". On the other hand, I know the The Scotsman is a reputable newspaper, so a review in it might be quite a good source proving notability (but I would need to click the link to be sure it is an actual in-depth, independent review of the subject of the draft article). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:23, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

You've done the right thing, by collecting possible references first. I suggest you create a short draft with a handful of what you think are the strongest reliable source references. Be sure that those are ABOUT him, as confirming his musical output, or what he has said in interviews, or what concerts per performed at, or who with, adds naught to confirming notability. (Music output worth listing, but not enough in and of itself to confirm notability.) David notMD (talk) 13:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

To explicate what David notMD said, Mel1425 (since I had to read it three times before I was clear that he was saying what I thought he intended): "confirming his musical output, or what he has said in interview, or what concerts [he has] performed at, or who with" are all things that don't contribute to establishing that he is notable. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 14:34, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that. David notMD (talk) 14:43, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all. I was just doing what wiki suggested by asking in Talk and I’m (obviously) not a seasoned user. I didn’t expect anyone to read all of the links. You’ve been most helpful, appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mel1425 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Mel1425 I read all the links, as I'm having a similar problem - at first I didn't have enough notable links, so I added more, now I'm told I have too many - but 'notable' is what you need to look up. Many of these are just references to something related to this dude or an album. As per above, pick 3 to start - but remove all that aren't write ups about him. So the prominent industry magazines or journals are notable, but the link to him playing at some festival, less likely. Media interviews by outlets that are hard to get on where they've typed up the conversation, larger city newspaper articles, separate these out and remove the rest, you will have a stronger short list. Broad coverage is also a criteria, and a google search wikipedia notable sources will likely bring up a few options. By the way, I'm completely unqualified to answer this, and even I can see several of your references are grasping at straws. You can still start the page and build it, just read up on the reference criteria. Best, Victor (talk) 06:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Victor. Yes. As a complete beginner on Wikipedia page creation, I read that the best place to start when wondering if someone was notable enough was to ask here. I should have read more on wiki first - but I don’t find it easy to navigate around the creator/editing pages. Now I know what’s required and that what I have is not sufficient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mel1425 (talk • contribs)

Mel1425 has been advised to not edit Talk comments after other people have responded. David notMD (talk) 17:46, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Mel1425, added a little welcome template to your talk page with some of the helpful hints and links you might find useful. Good luck!

--ARose Wolf 17:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Wiki sisters

Who also uses Fandom wiki & Miraheze wiki ? KENNY STEWART 6284 (talk) 16:05, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@KENNY STEWART 6284: Hello! Teahouse is really for questions relating to Wikipedia. But I will give you my answer, I used Fandom at one point but I got banned (for reasons I won't elaborate on). I then used Miraheze and then forgot about it and never used it again. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 16:19, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with Miraheze, actually, but I've used Fandom a lot. I recommend it sometimes as a good way to repurpose content that is too specific or fancruft-like: I set up Taskmaster Wiki, which has now become very successful due to the hard work of those who built on my initial work, and I've moved some old content we used to host on QI to QI Wiki. I think it's also a great way to learn wikitext, some wiki norms and how to work in a collaborative atmosphere. — Bilorv (talk) 17:33, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

As @Blaze The Wolf said WP:Tea House is for questions related to editing Wikipedia. While the Wikimedia Foundation does maintain the software MediaWiki that makes most Wiki projects possible, Fandom and Miraheze organizationally have nothing to do with English Wikipedia or any of its affiliated Wikimedia projects. I personally only learned recently that WikiVoyage is distinct from WikiTravel. Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:20, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Question

please i am trying to create an article

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

please what should i add or remove to make it approved? Mickel jack (talk) 13:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Well first, you haven't actually submitted the draft yet (another editor will have to add the correct template to allow you to do so). Second, you'll have to actually make sure the subject you're trying to make an article on meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, otherwise the article has no chance of getting approved. If you havent already I would recommend checking out this guide on creating your first article. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:17, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Mickel jack Your own website cannot be used as a reference. Things you have published do not establish notability. What is required is that people with no connection to you are publishing articles about you. Be aware that Wikipedia frowns on attempts at autobiography. See WP:AUTO. Or, let's assume this is not an attempt to create an article about yourself. The website of Godday Success cannot be used as a reference. What is required is that people with no connection to that person are publishing articles about that person. Expect the submitted draft to be Declined, if not Rejected. David notMD (talk) 13:26, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD while highly discouraged, Wikipedia:Autobiography is not strictly forbidden if created through Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Your point about Wikipedia:No original research certainly stands, which Godday Success certainly isn't. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:27, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Can admins please elaborate reasons of deleting articles?

Can admins please elaborate reasons of deleting articles? Nandkoli (talk) 16:06, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Nandkoli Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You were given a reason for deletion on your user talk page, User talk:Nandkoli. Specifically, what you wrote was a blatant advertisement, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. Please read the five pillars to learn more about Wikipedia; you may wish to use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Nandkoli, added a welcome message to the top of your talk page (User talk:Nandkoli) which references many of the links already given to you and offers additional links that you might find helpful. Wish you the best and good luck! --ARose Wolf 16:24, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Nandkoli, your deleted content was not an encyclopedia article. It was a how-to guide. It was unreferenced and contained a link to a copyrighted website, presumably yours. The content was very similar to that website, so your draft was a copyright violation. Please read What Wikipedia is not, which says While Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places and things, an article should not read like a "how-to" style owner's manual, cookbook, advice column (legal, medical or otherwise) or suggestion box. This includes tutorials, instruction manuals, game guides, and recipes. Please also read and study Your first article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:30, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Nandkoli You asked a similar question above, and it was answered. Please do not ask the same thing twice - it takes time away from the volunteers, time that could be spent better educating others about Wikipedia's notability requirements. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:45, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Declined

FYI

– Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 14:48, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Why the bloody hell was my fricking article declined! Dudeddddd 2405:201:4009:903C:D01B:B81E:EC02:6B0C (talk) 14:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello User with the IP 2405:201:4009:903C:D01B:B81E:EC02:6B0C and welcome to the Teahouse. You do not appear to have created a draft under this IP, could you please tell us how the draft is named? Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:17, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello! I understand having an article deleted is frustrating, could you please provide us with some more details so we can help you understand? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 15:17, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Using profanity in asking about a page that we cannot find is not helpful. Did you use profanity in your draft article? Your IP address has shifted, which is a reason to register an account, and also a reason to tell us the name of the declined article. But if you want your article to be accepted, it will be helpful to be civil to other reviewers. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

I agree with all the advice above. But the thing which none of the repliers mentioned is that your first article is a good guide to how to go about writing a Wikipedia article. Doing so is much more difficult than it appears. If you try it without having done quite a lot of editing on Wikipedia, you are like somebody who tries to build a house without having ever done much building work. And if you try it without first finding the independent reliable sources necessary to establish that the subject is notable, then you are like somebody who tries to build a house without building foundations or even checking if the ground is stable. --ColinFine (talk) 16:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Why the bloody hell did my fricking roof land on my TV? TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:46, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

False positives

What does the term "false positives" mean on Wikipedia? Peter Ormond 💬 17:04, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

One context is when a report to WP:AIV says: "This user was automatically reported by Huggle due to reverted vandalism after a final warning. Please verify their contributions carefully, it may be a false positive." In this situation it presumably means that the editor making the report has not bothered to check the situation, and that by leaving it to the Huggle software the report may have been made when no actual vandalism has occurred. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:18, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Additionally, an edit may falsely trigger an automatic filter, in which case, it would be false positive, and can be reported as such. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 17:28, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Peter Ormond: In most cases a false positive is exactly what it says. A positive result that is actually false. There's also something called a false negative which is the same thing except it's a negative result. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 18:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

moldova

Focus34 (talk) 18:35, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Focus34: I would take the warnings on your talk page seriously, or you might be blocked from editing. Do you have a question for the Teahouse? TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:42, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Moldovan language

Hello @Focus34: and welcome to the Teahouse! I'm looking at your contributions and I am guessing you are inquiring about why your edits to Moldovan language were reverted. Wikipedia requires that we include a citation to a reliable source when we add information to an article. It appears you did not do this when editing the article and that is why it was reverted. Just prior to this you removed sourced information from the article which is not acceptable. If you find yourself in this situation I would suggest you refer to WP:BRD which further explains how you are to proceed once reverted. I also added a welcome template to your talk page with some useful links to things new editors need to review before making edits here. Hopefully this helps. Good luck! --ARose Wolf 18:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

user indef'ed.. Meters (talk) 19:03, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Meters

--ARose Wolf 19:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Ecological Overshoot

I submitted 'Ecological Overshoot' as a new topic on August 10, no response as yet, I'm wondering whether I submitted it properly Global Aspiration (talk) 11:16, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Ecological Overshoot ― Qwerfjkl talk 11:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, as the notice at the bottom of the article says,
This may take 2–3 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 846 pending submissions waiting for review. ― Qwerfjkl talk 11:22, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Global Aspiration First, you will be asked to change your User name, as User names are not allowed to be organizations or companies, etc. Second, your draft will be declined. It is a wall of text with very few references. Sprinkled throughout are hyperlinks. Hyperlinks are now allowed. It may be possible to convert some to references. At the end, there is a long paragraph in quotes, without a ref. Try to fix as much as you can before a reviewer declines it. If declined, resolve what the reviewer identified as problems before resubmitting. David notMD (talk) 12:53, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

As a separate, important issue, the last two paragraphs, including that long quoted paragraph, appear to be via hyperlink to your own website. This is a no-no. Your website can be an external link, but not a ref. David notMD (talk) 13:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@Global Aspiration As well as agreeing with the points above (though I am unclear whether your username is actually a company or organisation, or just a gentle awareness-raising name to reflect your interest?), try to split the article up into different elements. In particular, the very first sentence should define what the subject is, rather than starting with the preamble. It's not a bad start for a new article, but there's a fair bit of work to do to get it into shape for an encyclopaedic article, and making it look less like a university essay. (Oh, and if you are directly involved with any of the organistions mentioned, do please follow the guidance at WP:COI to help you declare any conflicts of interest you might have.) Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

It appears this is their 2nd username that they've had. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 14:04, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, first name was the person's website. I suppose this one can stick, but still problems with citing and quoting own website. David notMD (talk) 21:04, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

removal of false information from a protected wikipedia page

how do i remove false information published in a protected wikipedia page? 117.195.120.250 (talk) 21:01, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. You can submit an edit request explaining what information is false, and provide a reliable source that says otherwise. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:09, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

About "Grunge-pop"

Hello, Teahouse!

I have editing the pages for various albums released currently. This year I have seen many musicians release recordings infused with heavy rock genres, from hardcore (see:Turnstile's GLOW ON), pop-punk (see: Willow's lately I feel EVERYTHING, Meet Me @ The Altar's Model Citizen EP), and also the unusual "grunge-pop" (see:Indigo De Souza's Any Shape You Take, Halsey's If I Can't Have Love, I Want Power). The reason I bring this up is because I think that making a section for the Grunge music page about and/or a separate page about this new genre name could be valuable. This year seems to have welcomed a new subgenre of alternative rock, but no publications I know have written specifically about it.

This is ultimately a thought for something that I think could be neat. But until this can be talked about more, I'll let it sit.

With thanks,Quail & Metal (talk) 21:11, 27 August 2021 (UTC) Quail & Metal (talk) 21:11, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! It's a great question and one that should be asked on the talk page for Grunge. I hope you do! Happy editing. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 21:21, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Question About Using a Source

Hello, I am considering creating an article for a director. I want to use this source: [1], but I am not sure if it's reliable under Wiki policy. Specifically, would I be able to use said source for the director's date of birth? And if not, would I be able to use it for any other purpose (e.g. establishing notability)?

Thanks for the help. Koikefan (talk) 19:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Koikefan: You might want to ask this at WP:Reliable Sources/Noticeboard as thye might have the answer to your question because they focus on reliable sources. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 19:47, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Good to know, I will post there. Thank you. Koikefan (talk) 19:59, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Koikefan: After reading the source you posted and the related About Us page, I would say that you can use that article to soruce the information, since it's non-controversial, but it won't help to demonstrate notability, because it appears to be a promotional, non-journalistic site. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:46, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

How do I mark an edit request as completed?

I made my first edit request contribution at [2]. (Had to add a recent assistant coach hire). I found the request at [3]. After I complete the edit request, am I supposed to update that page as having completed the task? It still shows as an uncompleted request. Dick Stamford (talk) 23:22, 27 August 2021 (UTC) Dick Stamford (talk) 23:22, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome, and thanks for helping with the edit requests. When you have completed a request (or turned it down), edit the request by setting answered=yes in the request. I did this one for you, as an example: [4] RudolfRed (talk) 23:47, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I see it now. Appreciate the quick answer. Dick Stamford (talk) 23:59, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

the battle was lost in one hour

how was a battle started and lost in the space off one hour? i cant quiet understand? Jonperez1985 (talk) 21:12, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

What article are you referring to? Please provide that information so we can attempt to help you. Thanks! Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 21:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Possibly refers to Anglo-Zanzibar War linked from the current Main Page entry under "On this day". 71.175.88.163 (talk) 21:49, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Yep. On the front page, in any section, clicking on the bold link will take you to an article that elaborates on the fact given. — Bilorv (talk) 00:24, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Can you please put a pic of Yuya on list of Yugioh Arc V characters

PRINCESS Ropa (talk) 18:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@PRINCESS Ropa: You can request this yourself on the talk page of the article you want the edit to be made on. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 18:34, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@PRINCESS Ropa Welcome, you can make a request at the talk page which I linked here Talk:List of Yu-Gi-Oh! Arc-V characters. Happy editing! Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

In this particular case, PRINCESS Ropa, it looks like there already is a depiction of Yuya in the main image, alongside other main characters. Since images of fictional characters are copyrighted and non-free, and Wikipedia is Creative Commons licensed, we strictly limit the non-free images we use to those that meet some rigid criteria. I do not think a second depiction of Yuya in the same list would pass our criteria. — Bilorv (talk) 00:26, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Incorrectly accused of having multiple accounts.

I made an edit to Physicians for Patient Protection. This was the immediate response:

"Quit your agenda I see you've logged into another account of yours now your vandal one has been banned. If you continue your disruptive editing on that article further investigation will be carried out against you and all the other accounts you use DiamondInTheRug. Inexpiable (talk) 21:35, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:Single purpose account, WP:Sockpuppet, WP:MEAT Inexpiable (talk) 21:36, 27 August 2021 (UTC)"

I have one and only one account. ReasonAndScience (talk) 21:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

How can I resolve this? ReasonAndScience (talk) 21:55, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

ReasonAndScience, the editing surrounding the Physicians for Patient Protection article has been very unusual recently. Your account is almost three years old, but apart from the six edits you made in 2018, all of your edits have been made in the past week, and all of them have concerned that article. There are a couple of other accounts that have either been created recently purely to edit that article, or which were created a while ago and have suddenly become very active at that article. That kind of thing often happens when one person decides to make multiple accounts to make it look like they are multiple people.

Would you mind explaining why you suddenly decided, after all this time, to start editing that article very prolifically? Was there some sort of posting on social media or similar that attracted your attention? Girth Summit _(blether) 22:20, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

I was directed to this by a friend (a fellow physician) who introduced me to "PPP". I was referred when I discussed with them about an infected olecranum bursitis that I had treated. Unable to find a physician to drain it, I ended up in the ER. There, I "midlevel"(a physician assistant) was unable to drain the fluid and I had to teach her how to do it (on myself!). As I am retired, I was not previously aware of midlevels and as I had recently moved to a new part of the country, I learned that there are few physicians, most replaced by lesser trained individuals. On this site, I saw all kinds of frankly derogatory information about physicians in general. When I review the references, it was apparent that the references did not say what the text was. I was (am!) highly motivated by this recent poor treatment and (having had some experience, as you note, a few years ago), I began to make edits to reflect some balance. ReasonAndScience (talk) 22:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Inexpiable seems to me to be too fast to accuse sockpuppetry against anyone editing that article. I did see that separate from your edits, Bonafidemd79 is blocked, mostly for being in an edit war. My advice - carry on. Given that the article has been nominated for deletion, you can express your opinion there. (you commented, but did not express a Keep or Delete. David notMD (talk) 03:49, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

How to can i move Dfrat to main article space

Hey Guys, I have created my wikipedia account for 4 days ago and i have already an experience on add article to wiki page, but recently when i created this account i did not see the option of "move" wish is mean that my account are not confirme yet or i have something going on i check every thing on my account and i didn't something skeetchie so all i ask is help me out with some info that could help me move some of my articles to main space. Thanks you <3 talk 02:08, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

You won't have the "move" option until your account is autoconfirmed. You won't satisfy the 4 day criterion until later today. Please be patient; there is no deadline. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:25, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Given that you are a new editor who has created or edited four draft article, with two Declined and none accepted yet, I strongly advise against moving any of these to mainspace. Be aware that articles are looked at by the New Pages Patrol, at which time could be flipped back to draft or nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 04:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Should articles with foreign-language titles use the Lang template?

According to MOS:FOREIGNITALIC and MOS:FOREIGNTITLE, the {{Lang}} template should be used whenever foreign-language text is mentioned in the article. I was wondering if this also applies to the bold reiteration of the article title in the lead? Or to the article title itself? I'm asking because it feels like it should, but I never actually see this happen in articles. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 11:08, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Text formatting/Archive 7 § Foreign-language article titles— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:29, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh and while I'm at it, what about section headers? Using templates in section headers is disallowed by MOS:HEADINGS. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 11:18, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Regarding editing of images in Wikipedia

Can you provide me with the information how to remove or add any image in any Wikipedia page Shyam ji Rana (talk) 05:59, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Most images are added with the wikitext [[File:Example...]]. If you are using the source editor, si.ply remove it add that text. If you are using the VisualEditor, press the delete key to delete it. ― Qwerfjkl talk 11:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

For removing, more of a question of Why rather than How. Are there images in articles that you believe do not belong? Can you provide examples? David notMD (talk) 11:36, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Crypto Nomads

Seeking some peer opinion on my draft Crypto Nomads. I discovered the 'term' and found strong references on the web, but no wiki article. Seemed interesting enough to appeal to Wiki followers yet may be 'trendy' and need discussion. TIA. CaliBuds (talk) 11:33, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

As I understand or misunderstand your draft, it tells me that a person describable as a "crypto nomad" is "not at any one place at any one time". I don't understand how this is possible for any person (e.g. at this one time this particular person is at one place: at a computer on a black-painted table in suburban Tokyo). If, verifiably, a "crypto nomad" can be at two or more places at one time, then you definitely have "DYK" material here. -- Hoary (talk) 12:20, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

HA good point regarding the 'decentralized' theory. Thanks @Hoary I will try to clarify that explanation in the article. CaliBuds (talk) 13:21, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, a better expression might be "citizens of nowhere" (a quote from Theresa May) or something along the lines of the descriptions of nomads we already know about. The references you already have look likely to reach the threshold for notability, so good luck with expanding the draft. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:10, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Excellent suggestion @Michael D. Turnbull thank you! CaliBuds (talk) 11:38, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Is a document on Wikisource a reliable source?

Wikipedia is not a reliable source and can't be cited. But, what about documents which have been uploaded onto Wikisource? Can they be cited in citations in a Wikipedia article? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: they're not reliable (and don't become reliable) on account of being uploaded to Wikisource, but lots of things on Wikisource are reliable. For instance, Ramanujan's Squaring the circle is a reliable source (an expert mathematician who published the paper in a peer-reviewed journal) and it happens to be hosted on Wikisource. The template {{Cite wikisource}} exists for this purpose and is a nice way to support our sister project. Does that answer your question? — Bilorv (talk) 11:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that’s good. I wasn’t meaning that they automatically are reliable sources, but wanted to be sure there’s no rule against it, like there is for Wikipedia. A matter of judgment based on each document, like other internet sources. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 12:58, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

What to do about a possibly spurious footnote?

Recently User:Sapphorain did some well-needed pruning of the plot section in the article Bring the Jubilee, and I was eager to contribute to this by removing a reference to Jules Verne's Propeller Island, which had been practically orphaned in the article. Sapphorain disputed my decision, however, and this exchange of words took place. I am not quite sure what to make of this all, and I don't want anyone to start edit-warring over this, so I thought I could inquire about this here. Prospero One (talk) 13:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

The correct place for discussing the matter is the article talk page, to which you have linked in your question. If you fail to reach a consensus there, the options include WP:3O and WP:DR. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:20, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, will refer to those two. --Prospero One (talk) 13:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Is there any format to create articles?

Is there any format to create articles? Nandkoli (talk) 16:05, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

See WP:YFA for process. David notMD (talk) 17:19, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Nandkoli: Welcome to the Teahouse! The format for Wikipedia articles is laid out in great detail in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:35, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Looking for Sources

When formulating a search query to find the most relevant sources, I would like to limit the results to webpages that contain a specific word X number of times or more. For example, if I wanted a useful source for Apple I would like to limit my results to webpages that contain the word a half dozen times at least to make sure the results are more than a passing mention of the subject.· Is it possible to do that? TipsyElephant (talk) 17:10, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: I've not fully tested but I think insource:"apple"*"apple"*"apple"*"apple"*"apple"*"apple" is returning what you're looking for, per H:INSOURCE (take a look at regular expression if you're not familiar with the concept). — Bilorv (talk) 17:30, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

The problem with the "apple" example is that the word refers to a fruit, a record label founded by the Beatles, and a technology company that used to be run by Steve Jobs. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:39, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

That could potentially be solved by adding: AND "technology", I think. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 17:42, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Or by combining with "incategory", or other ways of narrowing searches. But I think "apple" was just a generic example. — Bilorv (talk) 17:56, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Since insource searches are case sensitive, the example above shouldn't find articles that refer to Apple Records or Apple Inc. GoingBatty (talk) 17:39, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Help

please my article has been declined and i am new

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

please what should i do? Mickel jack (talk) 16:23, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mickel jack, an (over)simplified summary of the problem can be found at WP:42. Generally speaking, if these criteria are not met, there can't be a Wikipedia article about the person. Does this already answer the question? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:26, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

You should read the feedback, which you can see both on the draft page and on your user talk page. The words in blue are wikilinks to specific guidance which you ought to read. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:01, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mickel jack: If you like, you may add independent reliable sources to your draft to demonstrate how the person meets Wikipedia's notability guideline, and resubmit the draft. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:00, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

You posted here about this draft yesterday, and the reply was that as submitted, all of the references are to the website of the person Godday Success. None of those support notability. It is possible that in time this person may be notable, but for now, probably WP:TOOSOON. Information on your Talk page explains how to tag your draft so that it will be deleted by an Administrator. David notMD (talk) 18:13, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

TikTok app

I added some information on Tiktok but someone reverted it, the user who did it says that their are spelling mistakes. But if ther are he or anyone can do copyediting, change tone, how you can revert proper cited information. I provided the source of info there. It's not my OR, it's published in NY Times, India Today news websites. If the info is reliable according to all of you hosts keep it, otherwise ommit , no problem. Newton Euro (talk) 19:26, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

I think part of the problem was that when the reverting editor reached that article, it appeared to have two paragraphs that were confusingly similar. Perhaps there is a compromise to be made here: that some of the information could be reinserted, with its sources, but taking care only to say the most essential facts, and once only. You are right that it was somewhat harsh of the reverting editor to complain about your English; no, it isn't perfect, but it was quite comprehensible and could have been copy-edited. I'd suggest writing a simplified version on the article's talk-page, and pinging the reverting editor to ask them (and anyone else!) whether they find your simplified version more acceptable? If they don't respond, you can always transfer your new text back into the article in a few days, on the grounds that you've invited discussion, and no one has raised any objections. Elemimele (talk) 19:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

please i need your opinion

I created this article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Daryl_Tucker#article_submission_process

I submitted it for a while now, please I would like to know if there is anything i would need to change, so as to speed up the approval process. I would definitely appreciate any form of constructive criticism. Thank you. Prosperhaven (talk) 12:36, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

You have received feedback, on the draft page and on your user talk page. In addition to the points raised there by the reviewer, you also ought to address the problem of numerous links to disambiguation pages. The links ought to be changed to specific links to the intended targets. In identifying the unintended links to dab pages, you may find it convenient to highlight the problematic links in orange using the relevant preference at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:17, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Prosperhaven, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, I’m sorry for the tone used by David Biddulph which came off as a tad bit snappy, our job here is voluntary and telling people the same thing over and again can take its toll. So basically David Biddulph is correct, you indeed have received feedback from Theroadislong. If you have any further questions other than what has already been answered we are here to assist you. Celestina007 (talk) 15:51, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Prosperhaven: Welcome to the Teahouse! Movie titles should be italicized per WP:ITALICS. Also, please check the authors last and first names in the references - they should not be duplicated or in all capital letters. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:47, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

FYI - There are always hundreds of drafts waiting for reviews. Once submitted, it clearly states could be weeks. The system is not a queue. I cleaned up your draft a bit, but there is still unreferenced content. David notMD (talk) 18:08, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Prosperhaven: If you know Tucker or work for Tucker, you have a conflict of interest that you must disclose on your user page - see WP:DISCLOSE for information. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 00:19, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Timothy Heffner

I need to obtain a copyright release for the first of three photos for this article, as it was taken by Madia Photography. The photographer is willing to release the photo, but wishes to accomplish this task via a letter. Is it possible to upload the release letter and is there a standard format suitable for Wikipedia? The photographer is not computer saavy and is unfamiliar with Wikipedia. Pghmedicine (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pghmedicine: Welcome to the Teahouse! You may ask the photographer to review Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:21, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Pghmedicine, the photographs would, if the copyright problems were resolved, be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, not to Wikipedia. This is something you should ask about there, not here (not because it's ill-mannered or whatever to do so here, but because people there will be far better informed): you could simply copy your question above and paste it to Commons:Village pump/Copyright. (You should first log in there; you can use the same username and password that you use here.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:25, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Ida Lupino edit needed

Need TV director credit added for Ida Lupino.

pi 2600:6C44:F7F:9FBD:4C75:A12:3C0D:39E (talk) 20:54, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

I noticed that an episode of "Have Gun--Will Travel" was directed by Ida Lupino. That episode is not yet in her TV credits section. The episode is "The Golden Bar" from 3-18-61 according to TitanTV. It was episode 26 of season 4.

Welcome to the Teahouse! Thank you for noticing that the Ida Lupino article could be improved. I suggest you post your request on the article's talk page: Talk:Ida Lupino. If you have a URL for the TitanTV resources, please provide that as well. Thank you, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:31, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

When an article's subject dies, what updates need to occur?

I just implemented an edit request at Lester Coleman where it was reported the person died. Is there anything else that should be done? S0091 (talk) 20:26, 28 August 2021 (UTC) S0091 (talk) 20:26, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@S0091, if reliable sources confirm his death, then minor changes like wordings should be implemented for example “is” may be changed to “was” then you can adjacent his name put Mr xyz born (xxxx to xxxx) then perhaps adjust categories like removing them from the BLP category. Celestina007 (talk) 20:36, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

In this edit I have corrected categories for years of birth & death. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:25, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Also, the article would now qualify for a fair-use portrait photo? (In general, S0091, we may also change the lead photo when the subject dies, as we did at Prince Philip.) ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 02:02, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Font Problem

I want to edit article of my language. But how can I get the required font? It was easy while using mobile but now I am using PC. Kushal Dev Wiki (talk) 05:04, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

There is only one font for articles, unless you are talking about signatures. Please clarify. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 05:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kushal Dev Wiki. It sounds as if you are saying that you haven't got a font with the character set for that language installed on your PC. You will need to install a suitable font. If you don't know how to do that, I suggest asking at the Computing section of the Wikipedia Reference Desk. --ColinFine (talk)

Hi, Kushal, international font support is pretty good on most modern OSs. Are you using Windows, and may I ask which language/script? I suspect this question might be about typing the characters rather than showing them, if so, look for an on-screen soft keyboard (e.g. in Windows 10 this can be activated on desktop as well as on tablets.) The various MediaWiki editing interfaces also have means to select characters in a variety of scripts. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 03:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

From the OP's global contribs, it seems they have been contributing in Nepali Wikipedia and Wikisource. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 04:04, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Adding a second leader in info box. YMCA Queensland Youth Parliament

Hi All,

So I'm working on Draft:YMCA Queensland Youth Parliament. I added an info box but wish to put in a second leader (there is a Youth Governor and a Coordinator). How would I go about doing this? I tried editing the template but that didn't work. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 02:14, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Tomorrow and tomorrow: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per the documentation at Template:Infobox organization, you could use |leader_title2= and |leader_name2=. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:09, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Need help with rogue editor. Was referred here by dispute resolution.

This is about the page, The Palmer Report. I was told when I lodged a complaint on the dispute board, to come here. There is an edit war raging and luckily, it stopped in July. But a rogue editor has stirred the pot again and locked the page down and "talk" as well. Palmer Report is a Left-wing blog. It offers Political news and often analysis.

The founder once ran a site called "The daily News bin." The editor I refer to is Dr. Swaglordphd. I do not wish to speak bad of him but he is the one who will not let this go. Apparently, Swag changed PR header to say it is a fake news site. This produced hard feelings. Swag did say in his edit "feel free to revert." The problem is he's got alot of friends on here and some editors were pissed that this started up again so they locked the talk page. I read every comment, I made some of those comments and no threats were made, just pleas to please take "fake news" out of the header. This is not a fake news site and in fact was just featured on MSNBC the other night with Brian Williams. MSNBC is a recognized source. It would appear to me that some are just interested in "winning" versus really thinking about the issue. If you look at the talk page, several editors agree with me. Several. One even went so far as to say by stating that calling PR fake news one is basically calling them b-sh#t. This is not a non-biased thing and anyway Dr. swag must have known this since when he did his edit he invited anyone to revert it back. Dr. swag has also been complained about by Raw story for basically doing the same. They are also left-wing.It would seem he wants to as one complaint put it, push down the good stuff and push the bad stuff upward. I am hoping SOMEONE will take this seriously and even if the term fake news must remain there is no reason why it must remain in the header. I invite anyone to read what has been going on there and lastly -- Dr. swag now wants to change it AGAIN and wipe out the word "website" explaining that PR has always been the daily bin and that they are the exact same thing. This does not come from a reliable source. It comes from Dr. swag's preconceived notions. In fact I am and was a reader of both and they are two completely different sites. Here are his words that speak for themselves.I ask for help from a kind and non-biased editor or editors.

Swaglord: 4) For all intents and purposes, Daily News Bin is the Palmer Report. There is no difference in content or ownership between the two. Palmer literally just changed 2600:6C65:7E7F:B93E:3992:37A7:BB99:C937 (talk) 22:56, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Palmer Report. Karenthewriter (talk) 23:02, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Person using a very long IP number, your post above is very long. I confess that I haven't read it with care. (I really doubt that anyone will. In order to be persuasive, you must first be read; and in order to be read, you must maximize the signal/noise ratio.)

You seem to have a content dispute. There have been content disputes about the article in its talk page, Talk:Palmer Report. You don't seem to have participated. Participate, persuasively. (Tip: Before hitting "Publish changes", try reading what you've written, aloud. Cut the flab.) If the discussion is problematic, look at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for tips on what to do and how to do it.
Incidentally, while you're free to participate without being logged in, it's likely that what you say will be taken more seriously if you are logged in as such-and-such a user ID.
In recent days, you (or somebody resembling you) have twice attempted to bring this up on Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard. The first time, you were told "the filing editor did not correctly list any other editors and did not notify any other editors". That shows that you ignored (or didn't bother to read) the instructions at the top of that noticeboard. But that comment seems to have had no effect on you, because the second time: "Closed for failure to read instructions or follow the listing rules." Transporterman added: "The filing party [that's you] is obviously struggling with limited resources and the complexity of Wikipedia and is advised to seek help at the Wikipedia Teahouse which is intended to help newcomers." (I'll attempt to help by suggesting that you get a user ID, log in under it, and participate in the discussions on the page Talk:Palmer Report.) Meanwhile, don't kid yourself that the "Dispute resolution noticeboard" offers a way to avoid the need for meticulously worded statement. See "Psychology" on that noticeboard for an example of how a complainant should set out a case there.

-- Hoary (talk) 05:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Complaints about rogue editors in Wikipedia are common, and usually have either of two effects. Either they are simply ignored, or they result in a boomerang being thrown back at the complaining editor for the personal attack. Civility is the fourth pillar of Wikipedia, and does not just consist of the avoidance of "bad words", but of treating other editors with a minimum amount of respect and dignity because they are human beings. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:25, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: I would remind you that IPs are human too, even when they use IPv6 (person using a very long IP number). Furthermore, one should not have to register an account (never seen the term "user id" before btw) to get taken seriously; if some people are dismissing OP’s queries based on their IP status, they are the ones in the wrong. Of course, your other points about brevity still stand. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Tigraan, I do understand that IPs are human too; I dismissed the detail of this effusion not because its writer wasn't logged in but because of its prolixity. (As I glance below, I get the impression that you and I agree at least partially.) I didn't dismiss it as a whole; indeed, I responded to it (or anyway to certain aspects of it). -- Hoary (talk) 12:31, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

OK. I am going to respond and this post maybe long but that's just the way it is. You do not have to read if you choose not to. First off, I have participated so you are wrong about that. They locked the talk-page down. Then I went to dispute and was referred here. All rules followed! I DID let editors know. Wiki said to go to their talk-pages and that is exactly what I did. There was one editor who seemed to be anonymous but I posted on at least three editors talk-pages. I have said (about 50 times now) that I am recovering from a broken knee. I am not asking for sympathy for that but that IS the reason I cannot spend alot of time on here and the only reason I keep speaking about my broken knee is because everybody keeps ignoring me and asking me to create an account. I cannot due to the knee and the fact that the person whose computer I use is frankly not a fan of Wiki and does not want me to make an account using his computer which, being a kind and understanding soul, I understand.I am grateful he let me use it at all. I have tried being polite and kind and specific and I do not like nor do I understand being accused of a personal attack on an editor. I am sure he is a very nice person. I have a disagreement with him. I asked for help. That's all. It also boggles my mind. Free speech is a thing. Are you telling me that questioning an editor's judgement is considered a personal attack? So, this place that is supposedly opened to the world is in reality not because if one cannot have meaningful discussions and communications without being scolded then where is the free speech? I am on here because two blogs I love--Palmer Report and Raw Story--are being lied about. Sorry to be politically incorrect but when I am sweet and docile and polite I am labeled as not being courteous to the editors. An analogy would be like complaining there's a big in your food and being scolded by the manager for being impolite to bring it up. I am educated and as such I know when avoidance is happening. I think that is called the strawman's argument? I wrote with politeness and instead of actually addressing the issue you make it into something else. I read every comment including from many people who are not me and all I saw were many generalizations and no addressing the core principle--which is the heading of the article itself. A few )brave) editors tried but there seems to be a "good ole" system going on. It is quite a disillusionment. Did you know when I went to write this, a request from Wiki for money popped up? You have rules that are to deep, corporate and unyielding for any non-regular to be able to follow coherently. It is an exercise in futility. The fact that nobody has still addressed my question nor answered complaints on Raw Story as well as Palmer Report tells me the general consensus is non-caring about fairness and frankly honesty. Many of the editors on here are very smart and have been around quite a long, long time. That does not make my opinion any less valid. This is not said with anger but I understand it will be labeled as such because there appears to be no way to have an honest and fair conversation with many of the editors on here. (Not all.) In closing, ask yourself this: why are less and less people giving to your organization? Why is Wiki's reputation so awful? Why are there so many unresolved complaints? Even the smartest people have competency issues. I obviously cannot go to talk on a locked-down page and obviously if you had given even a cursory glance at my first post you'd know and understand that. I resent being called unwilling to learn---I came on here for one question. And it never was answered. In closing I will not bother you again but you will most likely continue to receive complaints, continue to rebuff anyone new or unaware of how the system works (or lacking in the means to spend much time learning.) I hope this is not considered an attack. It is not. You know what it is? It's called feedback. Yes, even Wikipedia editors are not immune from that. And sometimes feedback involves length and specific answers to questions which you seem to interpet as not being polite. I will leave you to your loftiness and please refer to this post if you ever want feedback, not anger. Bye, Someone who tried. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6c65:7e7f:b93e:3992:37a7:bb99:c937 (talk) 06:24, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

There is no freedom of speech on Wikipedia, any more than freedom of speech lets me rewrite an article in CNN when I don't like it. This is a privately owned website and the owners, the Wikimedia Foundation, just so happen to be kind enough to let the Wikipedia community decide by consensus what the boundaries for acceptable communication are. — Bilorv (talk) 10:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Writing long posts when one could have shortened them is not being polite. It has been part of the etiquette of letter-writing for centuries that you should take time to shorten what you write out of respect for the time of the reader. In the case of internet forums, this effect is even stronger because what one person writes is read by many, therefore the one person should be aware that whatever waste of time they cause is multiplied by the number of people reading.

Here’s what your first post here should have been: I have an edit dispute with User:Dr.Swag_Lord,_Ph.d at the page Palmer Report. They changed the header [lead] to say it is a fake news site. The page was locked [semi-protected] afterwards. I have an MSNBC source proving that the Palmer Report is not fake news, but Dr. SwagLord will not allow it because they have a bias.

I added in [brackets] the Wikipedia-jargon terms, but it is OK to not know these. Notice how this "summary" drops any discussion of the inner motives of other editors (left/right-wing bias, preconceived notions, etc.) which is irrelevant in any case, or the detailed history of the dispute (which can be found on the talk page of the article). Notice also how it is one short paragraph and will be read entirely by anyone coming across this noticeboard.

I suspect your latest post was also particularly ineffective. If I may do some mind-reading of Bilorv, they appear to have read up until your mention of "free speech" and then typed their reply without reading the rest. Having read the rest of your post, I know that the free speech thing (while a bit silly) could have been safely ignored; however, you only know that if you commit to reading the whole thing, which is not a very productive use of one’s time.

Finally, you said I came on here for one question. And it never was answered.. If you can cite a part of your initial post that is less than 50 words and that asks a question, I would be very impressed, because I do not see it. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I read both DRN requests, I've read the entire talk page, and I've read your post here. It was a lot of reading. And here is my take on the situation- you are convalescing, and have a deep personal passion for this page. You have pled your case to the editors- and they were not persuaded. That doesn't mean you're wrong and they're right- however- WP operates by consensus and consensus is against you. When you were told that- you continued to post unnecessarily long paragraphs on the talk page demanding that your POV be enacted and calling anyone who disagreed with your names "Rouge" etc. At that point- it was determined you were being disruptive (you were) and the Talk was locked down so you could go cool off. You came back and resumed the same thing and opened two DRNS without reading the rules of that page or following our very simple instructions.

My advice is this. Stop now. Consensus is against you. Multiple other editors disagree with you. Move on, find another passion- be it here on WP or elsewhere. But you are beating a dead horse at this point and consensus is unlikely to change the longer you do so. What is likely to happen is you being completely removed from WP. I would much rather see you learn to become a useful contributor to this project. But you cannot continue the way you have been. Be like Elsa and Let it go friend. Nightenbelle (talk) 15:21, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I've been observing this article and Nightenbelle's summary is accurate, in my opinion. The only thing I would add is that the Talk page was locked, in part, because of real-world editor safety concerns. The owner of the website about which this article is about has been using his large Twitter following to dox WP editors, to threaten to sue editors, to make even more extreme personal threats beyond lawsuits, and to exhort his followers to flood Wikipedia Talk spaces with complaints about WP editors as part of a "war of attrition" [sic] against Wikipedia. Chetsford (talk) 15:28, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

I want to begin by thanking Tigraan, Nightenbelle and Chetsford for speaking with humility and not scolding me.I appreciate the kindness and all of your thoughts. Tigraan, that "how it should have looked" post was perfect and you nailed exactly what I wanted to say. I cannot thank you enough.I am referring to this below:

"I have an edit dispute with User:Dr.Swag_Lord,_Ph.d at the page Palmer Report. They changed the header [lead] to say it is a fake news site. The page was locked [semi-protected] afterwards. I have an MSNBC source proving that the Palmer Report is not fake news, but Dr. SwagLord will not allow it because they have a bias."

Chetsford-I knew about the threats of a lawsuit but I deeply hope and pray no personal threats were made because that would be horrific and they would lose my support if that happened.

Nightenbelle-thank you. You are correct. Palmer Report AND Raw Story are my two favorite websites. I feel I have debated all I can and simply cannot do anymore. For Palmer Report, I have a feeling they will be featured on many more "reliable sources" besides MSNBC so in time perhaps things will change. With Raw Story they were labeled a "tabloid" not fake news, it seems someone within the company complained so will leave it to them. As for DoctorSwagLordPHD I would not attack or bully him or any editor. I thank you again for educating me and I hope things work out for both websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6c65:7e7f:b93e:5ccf:f891:888d:5c08 (talk) 19:28, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Now that was much more readable! If you want to stick around, consider WP:REGISTER. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:04, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

@2600:6c65:7e7f:b93e:5ccf:f891:888d:5c08 My apologize, But i rather "unsucessfully" grasp most of the points from your explanation... perhaps it's too long, even for me. but i guess, and hopefully, i understood the important things that you mention. But first of all, tq the "They are also "left-wing." It would seem he wants to as one complaint put it, push down the good stuff and push the bad stuff upward. I am hoping SOMEONE will take this seriously and even if the term fake news must remain there is no reason why it must remain in the header." At first, i thought this is some political conflict that you were invoulved. But i think it's not the case. You did mention the thing about the correspondant Contributor whos Put the term "Fake News" there, and the Correspondant said "feel free to revert". I've alread read some discussion there, and some statements on the page stated that this Contributor was a Rogue Editor. Actually quite many do supported this claim. But Consensus is consensus, if the consensus has been reached, then it is the best choice for now. Plus there are several valid Sources that backed the argument about the status of that blog (PR) being as it is, mentioned on the Article. @Chetsford also mentioned about The owner of the correspondant website blog (PR) about which this article is describing. They has been using their large Twitter following to dox Wikipedia editors/contributors. So overall, i dont have any positive thing to say about this blog (PR), also the Wikipedia article itself covering the blog is well sourced and has many valid sources cited in it. 海之 16:41, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, :C937. I'm sorry to hear about your knee, and hope it heals well. I think your friend may be mistaken about the dangers of using his computer to create an account, but, his PC = his rules, right? As someone who works in IT for my day job, I would suggest that you use a separate (and non-admin) user account on his PC. If that's not possible, at least use a separate web-browser profile to keep all the cookies, history, and login tokens apart. Apologies that you are being repeatedly told to create an account, it's because having one makes it a lot easier for us to communicate with you. I won't go into detail now, but if you want to know, ask. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 07:31, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Mark 14 torpedo article minor error

I have noticed a small error in the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_14_torpedo and I don't know who to report it to. Since I don't have the references to know what numbers are correct I didn't try to edit them myself. The problem is with the weights given in the specifications table at the start of the article. It says:

Mod.0:3,000 lb (1,400 kg) Mod.3:3,061 lb (1,388 kg) As you can see, weight in pounds is higher for the Mod.3 version but mass in kg is higher for the Mod.0 version. (Excuse me for being pedantic, but in physics courses I had drilled into me that pounds are a unit of weight while kilograms are mass.) If one model is heavier in one set of units it should also be the heavier in the other units, no?

A quick conversion gives me that 3000 lb should be about 1361 kg.

Thanks ---bill rogers 47.224.51.236 (talk) 02:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

The explanation is that the wikitext has "| weight = Mod.0:{{convert|3000|lb|abbr=on}} Mod.3:{{convert|3061|lb|abbr=on}}". The conversion uses more sig figs for the mod 3 because the input is to more sig figs. Obviously a source is needed, then appropriate changes can be made. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Along with that, you're actually wrong (but also right) in stating that pounds are a unit of weight while kilograms are mass. In the US this is true, but practically everywhere else it isn't. In other countries kilograms are used to measure weight as well as mass (it's called the metric system). Don't worry, it's confusing. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:22, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, most practical weighing scales (spring, piezo) do measure weight (force of the object due to gravity), but are marked in mass units (g or kg) not force units (N), and assume a standard value for g. (Some electronic scales might have two- or even three-point calibration, so they don't need to assume, but it's been a long time since I used one of those for analytical chemistry, and my memory's a bit hazy.) Since I'm not in the US, I can happily avoid the whole lb-force vs. lb-mass thing. ;) ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 10:06, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Bill, if you're sure it's within 3000 ± 10 lb, you can use {{convert|3000|lb|abbr=on|sigfig=3}} thus: 3,000 lb (1,360 kg). ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 10:13, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Would Like To Create A Page For The American Basketball Hall Of Fame

Hello,

I was asked about creating a page for The American Basketball Hall Of Fame. However, creating pages and rules on what can be published is something I'm not at all familiar with so any help or if someone could create the page for me or give me any help with this, it would be greatly appreciated. Listed below is what the page will look like. Dusties907 (talk) 21:51, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Condensed for brevity

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

American Basketball Hall of Fame American-Basketball-HOF-logo_Ink.png

Established 2019 Location Inkster, Michigan

Type American Basketball Hall of Fame Founder LaMont "ShowBoat" Robinson Website www.americanbasketballhof.org

The American Basketball Hall of Fame is an American history hall of fame that will be located in the city of Inkster, Michigan. It will honor and tell the full history of basketball. The American Basketball Hall of Fame was founded by LaMont "ShowBoat" Robinson who played 28 years of barnstorming from 1987-2015. Robinson played in Denmark and the USBL, then with several barnstorming teams Meadowlark Lemon Harlem All-Stars, 1989 Harlem Globetrotters and Washington General Tour, ShowBoat Robinson's Harlem Road Kings, ShowBoat Robinson's Harlem Clowns. Robinson has been nominated to the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame in 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021. He was inducted into the American Basketball Hall of Fame Class of 2021.

The American Basketball Hall of Fame will honor basketball men and women as well as coaches and give players another chance to be inducted into a national hall of fame. The American Basketball Hall of Fame will look closely at high school legends, playground hoopsters, small college players, oversea players, barnstorming players and teams, ABA, CBA, EBA, USBL, Harlem Globetrotters, Harlem Clowns, Harlem Wizards etc... The American Basketball Hall of Fame will not just honor major college and NBA players.

The American Basketball Hall of Fame hosted its inaugural class on Sunday October 13, 2019 in the city of Detroit, Michigan and due to covid-19 the 2020 and 2021 live ceremonies were canceled. The American Basketball Hall of Fame did host two classes 2020, 2021 of posthumous players, that was virtual.

The Goal of the American Basketball Hall of Fame is to build a state-of-the-art world class hall of fame that will be 80,000 sq. ft. that will be also one of the top premier basketball facilities in the world, with track, weight room, film room, classrooms, dormitory rooms, basketball theme restaurant and the basketball field-house will feature 6-8 basketball courts for camps, clinics, AAU tournaments and summer leagues etc... To date the American Basketball Hall of Fame has inducted 50 players, coaches and contributors.

2019 Class

Sam Jones Derrick Coleman Spencer Haywood Vinnie “Microwave” Johnson Willie Burton Jalen Rose Archie Clark LaMont “ShowBoat” Robinson Al Gibson Howard White Stanly Ruffin George Blaha Curtis “Flint” Bloxson Coach Will Robinson Tim McCormick John Long Antoine “The Judge” Joubert Coach Perry Watson

 2020 Posthumous Class

. Dr. James Naismith . Coach John Thompson . Earl "The Goat Maguigut . Wilt Chamberlain . Abe Saperstein . Meadowlark Lemon . Curtis Jones . Kobe Bryant . John Havlicek . Marques Haynes . Pete Maravich . Coach Pat Summitt . Len Bias . Coach John McLendon . Gianna Bryant

2021 Posthumous Class

Tony Tolbert Fred "Curly" Neal Roy Tarpley Howard Garfinkel Paul Westphal Connie Hawkins Dwayne "Pearl" Washington Louis "Red" Klotz John Wooden Raymond Lewis Bob Douglas Holcombe Rucker Coach Al McGuire William "Pop" Gates Edwin B. Henderson Tyron "Alimoe" Evans Terry Dudrod "Jumpin" Jackie Jackson Coach Clarence "Big House" Gaines

Dusties907 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. When you say you were "asked", do you work for this organization? If so, please see your user talk page for important information. Please understand that a Wikipedia article about an organization must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. Wikipedia has no interest in what an organization wants to say about itself. If you are able to summarize what others say about the hall of fame, you may use Articles for creation to create and submit a draft. Please read Your first article. 331dot (talk) 22:03, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Dusties907. I note that you are in competition with the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame, but this is not a problem on Wikipedia; provided you have sources supporting an ABHoF article they can both co-exist, and ABHoF can be added to the Basketball Hall of Fame (disambiguation) list.

I would also point out that only those players/coaches notable enough (by Wikipedia's standards for basketball) to have an article about them in Wikipedia should be listed in an ABHoF article. Of course, if some are notable enough, but there are no articles yet, feel free to create the articles.--Verbarson (talk) 10:18, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Questions about Pictures. YMCA Youth Parliament

Hi folks, and thank you for always being so helpful.

So I'm working on Draft:YMCA Queensland Youth Parliament and have tried to put 2 pictures in, the logo and a swearing in ceremony.

The first one was removed by a bot, I believe in error (Logos are stated as an exemption to non-free policy)

The second one is File:Queensland Youth Parliament Swearing In.png. I'm a bit lost about the whole liscnencing thing but I feel like this should be allowed. Can someone please have a look and put the correct licencing.

I understand that some pictures cannot work so if that's the case please tell me. I just want to make a good article, I'm not trying to breach copyright or get deleted.

Thank you! Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 07:06, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tomorrow and tomorrow. Non free logos and non free images in general are not permitted in drafts. They are permitted in main space encyclopedia articles only if they are in full compliance with all the conditions of WP:NFCI. As for the photo, the copyright status is dubious. If you are "a bit lost about the whole licencing thing" then how can you possibly "feel like this should be allowed"? Copyright status has to do with complicated verifiable facts and not feelings. If you want to use the image, then it is up to you to be 100% sure that the licensing status is completely correct. Images are not required and other issues are vastly more important when writing an acceptable draft. Images or the lack thereof have no effect on the acceptance of a draft. They can always be added later. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Tomorrow and tomorrow. Logos are not an exemption to non-free policy at all. Non-free logos can be used and are often OK to use per item 2 of WP:NFCI, but each use of such a logo would still need to comply with all ten non-free content use criteria listed here. Non-free content is not allowed to be used in drafts per non-free content use criterion #9 and Wikipedia:Drafts#Preparing drafts; so, that's why the bot removed the file. Since File:Queensland Youth Parliament emblem.png is currently unused, it also fails non-free content use criterion #7. This means that it will be tagged (most likely within the next day or so) for speedy deletion per speedy deletion criterion F5. A notification about this should be added to your user talk page once that happens, but don't panic and re-add the image when it does. Once the draft has been approved as an article, you can re-add the logo. If you try to do so before then, the file will keep getting removed. If you try to do so too many times, you might find yourself being blocked by an administrator. If the file ends up deleted before the draft is accepted, don't reupload the file. Files which are deleted aren't gone forever, but rather are only hidden from public view. Files deleted for F5 reasons can be restored (usually quite easily) by either posting a request at WP:REFUND or by asking the administrator who deleted to do so by posting a message on their user talk page. As for the other photo, as Cullen328 posted above, if you're not reasonably sure about an image's copyright status, don't upload the file. It won't be the end of the world if you do and it turns out you're wrong, but you probably should try to avoid that whenever possible. Instead, try seeking other opinions at WP:MCQ or c:COM:VPC. My personal opinion is that it's probably going to be quite hard (near impossible) to justify File:Queensland Youth Parliament Swearing In.png as non-free content; so, I don't think that's a realistic option and a consensus can be established for such a license. That means it's sort of a free license or bust kind of thing in which you're going to need to get the WP:CONSENT of the person who took the photo, unless there's some reason this might be within the public domain per c:COM:AUSTRALIA. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:29, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I believe this link is corrupted. I'm interested.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagar_Films I believe the link to this official website from the Wikipedia page is corrupted to usurp the rightful owners being paid.2600:1005:B11B:515F:6448:1E92:F0B4:80F6 (talk) 10:56, 29 August 2021 (UTC) 2600:1005:B11B:515F:6448:1E92:F0B4:80F6 (talk) 10:56, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP 2600:1005:B11B:515F:6448:1E92:F0B4:80F6. Sometimes an official website will become a dead link for some reason, but this isn't always for nefarious reasons. Moreover, the subjects of Wikipedia articles don't WP:OWN the article and don't receive any payment for having an article (at least not from Wikipedia) written about them; so, I not sure how that applies to Wikipedia. If you're referring to the subjects being compensated in some way by the number of people who visit their website, then that's not something Wikipedia controls and is not something Wikipedia is concerned with. If the current "official website" link in the article is incorrect, the you can add the correct link yourself if you want. If you're somehow unable to do so or are a representative of Sagar Films, just post a request at Talk:Sagar Films asking for the link to be updated. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:08, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Notability of the Maharashtra Lokayukta

If I understand correctly, "Maharashtra Lokayukta" is a state-wide office of a federal country. Do I correctly understand that Draft:Sanjay Bhatia (administrator) is about a person presumed to be notable per WP:NPOLITICIAN? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:59, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

I have accepted the declined and rejected article now; feel free to nominate it for deletion if I'm completely incorrect about this. I'll notify Dan arndt and Hatchens. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Not clear why you are mentioning this at Teahouse. Article in question, as draft about Sanjay Bhatia, was Declined, then Rejected, then proposed for Speedy deletion, that quashed, creating editor extensively edited, and you have accepted as article. Conscientiously, you notified the editors who D'd, R'd and SD'd. David notMD (talk) 22:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

David notMD, thanks for having had a look and providing two additional eyes; that's basically what I was looking for. I wondered whether I'm overlooking something, asked what I perceived to be a pretty newbie-type question about notability here, answered it myself by digging further and chose to move the article myself, relying on AfD instead of potential Teahouse objections for consensus. I could alternatively have removed my question in the moment I moved the page to mainspace. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:56, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

ToBeFree At least for U.S., there is a bias against appointed positions justifying notability except at highest levels (Supreme Court, President's Cabinet). David notMD (talk) 02:01, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:34, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Very interesting discussion. I'm just saving this discussion link for the future references purposes. Thanks to David notMD for the explaination. Thank you ToBeFree for tagging me over here. -Hatchens (talk) 12:11, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

empty tables policy

Is there a policy about adding tables with no information? Govvy (talk) 09:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Govvy I don't know if there's a specific policy or guideline other than what you might find at MOS:TABLES, but there seems to be no encyclopedic value in doing so much in the same way there isn't (at least in my opinion) any encyclopedic value in adding empty sections (i.e. section with only headings and no content). Some people don't like to work in their user sandboxes and instead prefer to "create" content in stages in the article namespace. So, it could be a case where someone adds the table syntax one day, but intends to come back the next day and fill in the table. In such a case, it might be best just to hid the syntax until the table is complete (or at least partially complete). On the other hand, if the table has been "empty" for quite sometime, being WP:BOLD and removing it seems reasonable. The syntax will still be in the page history and can be easily restored as needed at some later date; so, no information will really be lost. Regardless of whether you hide or remove, you probably should make your reasons clear in an edit summary and also possibly on the article's talk page. It's also something that's unlikely going to be considered an exemption to three-revert rule; so, I wouldn't edit war over it. If you're reverted, start a discussion on the article talk page and try and resolve things that way. One last thing would be that there's some editor simply going around adding empty tables to articles without any rhyme or reason. In this case, you'll have to assess whether this is just a new editor (not only a new account but also not an very experienced editor) who might mean well. If that's the case, perhaps a friendly message of their user talk page would be a good first step instead of a more scary sounding user warning template. If there's no response and they keeping on doing the same thing, then perhaps more serious warnings and then seeking administrator assistance would be warranted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:42, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: k, It's when I came across the statistics tables on 2021–22 SBV Vitesse season which was just removed again. Even at 2021–22 Sparta Rotterdam season, I really don't get the need for adding tables with no information on! I'd probably get reverted there if I removed them! lol. Cheers know. Govvy (talk) 10:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Govvy: Since there appears to be some disagreement about this between you and another editor at least at 2021–22 SBV Vitesse season, trying using the article talk page instead of WP:REVTALKing to each other. You also can always seek input from WP:FOOTY by starting a discussion on the article talk page and then adding a {{Please see}} to WT:FOOTY. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:14, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I was just looking for a policy to base my argument on! I already pointed out the issue at the footy project. I thought someone here might know more about the policies than I do. Govvy (talk) 12:13, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Senior advice for Wiki

Hi and thanks for giving me the chance to ask a question here. I have submitted a wiki but been declined. I don’t understand how to change it with what’s requested. Any experienced wiki reviewer please, many thanks. Goldstriker (talk) 11:37, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

On the draft page and on your user talk page there is feedback, in which the words in blue are wikilinks to specific advice. Was there some particular part of that advice which you didn't understand? --David Biddulph (talk) 12:59, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Copyright material uploading process

How can I submit a copyright information, which I have the authorisation to use in Wikipedia in whole or in parts Abmsarwer (talk) 13:45, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Authorisation just to use in Wikipedia is no use. Needs to be available for use by everyone, including for commercial use. See WP:Donating copyrighted materials. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:48, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Regarding confirmation!

Hi I didn't got confirmed access ECN001 (talk) 12:47, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Your account became autoconfirmed an hour or two ago when it reached 4 days old. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Note: OP blocked for Socking by Bbb23. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:27, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

How to create good articles? (Help needed)

Hi! I am creating certain articles, with reliable sources. I want to know how I can learn and to improve. Nasitasa (talk) 11:16, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nasitasa. Maybe a good place to start would be look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. You also find some helpful information in Help:Your first article. Creating articles, however, can be quite hard and it isn't the only way to contribute to Wikipedia as explained here; sometimes, you can learn a lot more about Wikipedia much faster by working on improving existing articles instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:31, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly, thanks! I like helping, but also creating. As you can read on my user page, I want to create articles to help math development. Is that okay?--Nasitasa (talk) 11:33, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

It's not "not Okay" to want to create new articles, but creating proper articles can be quite hard and bit discouraging if you're not very familiar with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines. Since you're interested in math, maybe take a look at WP:WPMATHS and see if you can find some editors to discuss the articles you want to create with, and also see if there are other way you can help "math development" that do not involve creating new articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:38, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Nasitasa PLEASE STOP CREATING DRAFTS. Yes, I shouted. From looking at your User page and Contributions, since creating an account on 28 August, you have had two drafts declined, have at least five that have been submitted to AfC, awaiting review, and have created more than 20 drafts not yet submitted, 21 listed at Category:Countries participating in the International Mathematical Olympiad. None of those drafts have references. Example: Draft:Brunei at the International Mathematical Olympiad. While I am not in the maths field, I consider it very unlikely that these will ever become accepted as articles. You are potentially creating a tremendous amount of work for volunteer reviewers. Furthermore, I believe that your draft Draft:2021 International Mathematical Olympiad is a copyright violation. In direct answer to your initial question, do not attempt to create an article unless you have references (plural) to substantiate its notability. David notMD (talk) 13:06, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

UPDATE: Blocked as sock, and Materialscientist did a massive Speedy delete. David notMD (talk) 15:02, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

cite a website

HI Ive read the templates etc and I just cant figure out how to cite a newspaper article. Is there any way this can be simply explained to me? Thanks, Palisades1 (talk) 16:26, 29 August 2021 (UTC) Palisades1 (talk) 16:26, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Palisades1, and welcome to the Teahouse. When you are citing a newspaper article, the article is what you should cite: bibiliographic information such as the newspaper, date published, title, author, and maybe page number. If the article happens to be available online, then it is really helpful to readers to include a URL, but that is a convenience, not an integral part of the citation (and if the publishers haven't put the article on line, then it can't be provided). An easy way to do this is to use the template {{cite news}}: follow that link to the documentation for the template, to see what the parameters are, and some examples of their use. For more general information about citing, see CITE. --ColinFine (talk) 16:34, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Dick Sweeney

The name of this person is not Dick Sweeney. It is Richard Sweeney. I need the title of this article renamed. Can somebody do this for me?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Sweeney Joshuastrode89 (talk) 23:42, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Joshuastrode89:It looks like all the sources refer to him as Dick Sweeney, so this seems to be a case of WP:COMMONNAME. RudolfRed (talk) 23:46, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok. How do we change the name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshuastrode89 (talk • contribs)

@Joshuastrode89: We don't, unless sources change it. The opening sentence states his real name. Everything is in order for Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:58, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Title left as is. First line of Lead now starts with Richard 'Dick' Sweeney David notMD (talk) 02:08, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Aaand, BarrelProof has changed it back to Richard Sweeney, along with further edits elsewhere. I do hope there is no sock- or meat-puppetry going on here. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.179.94 (talk) 19:31, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I did not change the title of the article, and I don't think the article title should be changed. I changed its opening phrase, per MOS:HYPOCORISM. See, e.g., Bill Clinton (no "Bill" in the opening phrase) and Jimmy Carter (no "Jimmy" in the opening phrase). "Dick" is a very common nickname for people named Richard. See also Dick Nixon. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:35, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Useful Tools

Hello, I am preparing and article in my sandbox to submit for an editorial review. I understood that there was an option called "useful tools". I cannot find it, but specifically. I am looking for the table of contents code and information box. Thank you in advance . . . JHKimAnalyst (talk) 14:18, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JHKimAnalyst, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't know of an option called "useful tools" (but somebody else might). Table of contents is automatic, and draws all its information from the headers you have provided. For information about infoboxes, see WP:Infoboxes - it's often easiest to find an article which uses the same infobox that you need, copy the source code, and then change the parameters appropriately.

However, a quick look at your sandbox suggests that an infobox is not what you need to worry about at present - it's like painting the windows when you haven't solidly built the house. At the moment, your draft doesn't seem to know whether it is about Nance or about his theory, and it seems to rely much too much on what he says or wants to say. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Please read Your first article if you haven't already. And if you have any connection with Nance you must declare it: see COI. --ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, ColinFine thank you for information on the table of contents and information box. The "useful tools" was seen on YouTube in a demonstration after I could not find it in any of the available options on the page. I will review the first article. After editing other articles, I decide to write on the subject after learning of his latest accomplishment after gathering some information in the public domain and others who know the subject. Leadership is a very important topic for many reasons watching what is going on in the world today. I was using two articles accepted as a guide for three reasons (1) already accepted, (2) One is about the person who attempted what the subject accomplished, and (3) the things in the draft are corroborated by credible sources including 5 editors ^[1]. Both articles talk about the subjects of the article and what they attempted to do or did. The theory based on the sources is a first, so I want to be the first about a first. COI should be no problem and eventually others can have the opportunity to contribute or read.--JHKimAnalyst (talk) 18:48, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

References

^ Goethals & Sorenson, 2006; Sorenson, et al., 2011

Hello, JHKimAnalyst. I'm no wiser about "useful tools", but WP:Tools might be helpful. I accept that leadership is an important topic in the world today; but a particular theory may or may not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. "Importance" is not per se enough, nor are things such as influence, popularity, or innovation: what matters is that a subject has been written about in reliable published sources by people who have no connection with the subject. If LGT is "a first", it may well be WP:TOOSOON for an article. An article on it must not be based on anything written by Nance or his associates, but entirely on material about the theory that is created and published entirely independent of him: if such material does not yet exist, then there cannot be a Wikipedia article on it. (An article on Nance similarly requires independent sources about him, not his own or his associates' publications).

As for existing articles, please read other stuff exists. The other articles you are referring to may be excellent, and have been accepted after review; or they may have been created before we became as careful about standards, and number among the tens of thousands of seriously substandard articles which ought to be improved or deleted. An article should not generally be about both a person and their invention: if both are notable, there should be two separate articles; if they are not (for example, if the theory is notable, but there has been little independent published information about its originator) then there should be an article on one which has brief information on the other.

I am happy to accept your assurance that you have no COI (except that "I want to be the first" is itself a kind of COI!); I wondered because of your username (...Analyst) and because of the non-neutral way you wrote about him. I suggest you put a statement on your user page explaining your interest but that you have no connection with Nance, to avoid other editors getting suspicious. --ColinFine (talk) 19:53, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Dave Clark Five and Ron Ryan

What can be done to determine the validity of these claims that someone named Ron Ryan wrote the songs credited to Dave Clark of the Dave Clark Five? JoeBotterill (talk) 20:11, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@JoeBotterill: Welcome to the Teahouse! There is a discussion on this topic on Talk:The Dave Clark Five, so you might want to participate there. Since the claim is also mentioned on The Riot Squad article, you might want to post on Talk:The Riot Squad to ask interested editors to participate at the discussion at Talk:The Dave Clark Five. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:04, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Adding images.

Hi!

I am currently trying to build a wikipedia page on [wikispooks.com/wiki/wikispooks WikiSpooks] and I want to add an infobox because it is a wiki and it would give out fast information on it but I am having trouble on how to add the icon of the website. Do you know how I can do that? Thanks. ButterSlipper (talk) 17:08, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@ButterSlipper: Welcome to the Teahouse! To upload the website icon to Wikipedia, you can use the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard and click "Upload a non-free file". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:19, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Here's a ref you can use: [5]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:43, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@ButterSlipper: Properly uploading and using images can be a tricky thing to do. Perhaps it would be better for you to wait to upload any files until you've taken some time to look at Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files and also c:Commons:Licensing. Articles aren't required to have images and there are quite a lot of restrictions on how certain types of images may be used; for example, non-free images can only be used under if they satisfy certain specific criteria. So, if you're going to try and create a new Wikipedia article, then may wait on the images until you actually do so. New article creation in and of itself is quite hard and there are many things completely unrelated to images that need to be done for the article to avoid ending up deleted; so, focus on creating the article first, and then figure out the images later on. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:12, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Why is it called courtesy vanishing?

Why is it called courtesy vanishing? Is it because vanishing is offered as a courtesy to the user? I’ve been lurking here for a while and only recently registered an account. I know this question isn’t about the articles themselves, but I am curious. Thanks for any insight. The Council of Seraphim | speak before the Council 16:14, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

For information about courtesy vanishing, see Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:54, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Pretty much yeah. WP:VANISH isn't something granted by the Terms of Use, but is sometimes granted anyway, hence "courtesy". Compare Commons' Courtesy deletions. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:04, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Ah, okay. That makes sense. Thanks! The Council of Seraphim | speak before the Council 22:39, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

How can i change an article's name after moving it to main space

Hey guys so i recently creat an article and i accidently wrote the in title wrong after releasing it to main space what can i do guys any help??. talk 19:34, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@HellmuSa: Welcome to the Teahouse! It appears you moved your page from your sandbox to Abdeljabbar Louzir. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:51, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

HellmuSa, in order to rename it, click on the "Move" option and answer the questions you'll be asked. Incidentally, I don't understand "his father worked as a shovel". -- Hoary (talk) 23:46, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Formatting/Reference Problem

Courtesy link: Alex Berenson § Opposition to cannabis legalization
The Alex Berenson section Opposition to Cannabis Legalization has a bunch of references gobbledygook that needs fixing. I'd do it myself but I have no idea what it would entail.

Ethphonehome (talk) 19:07, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Ethphonehome, whoever concocted this expects us to believe that each of its cited (and quoted) nuggets appears on page 1 of whatever. Possibly this person believed that p was an obligatory field of Template:R and that "1" was the most innocuous value for it. However, p is not an obligatory field, and it's safe to remove each instance of "p=1 |". (I'd guess that all are meaningless, but of course it's possible that one or two of these really are on page one of whatever it is.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:00, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Correction to Grace Lee Whitney Filmography

Grace Lee Whitney (Actress) appeared in an episode of Kraft Suspense Theatre - Episode Title "The Name of the Game" - Season 1, Episode 10 on Dec 26, 1963, yet it is not listed on her Wikipedia page filmography. Don't know how to correct it myself (would be hesitant to do so). Anyone with skills is welcome. Thank you. 2603:8080:2940:3C:1184:2060:1F0D:867E (talk) 23:37, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

The skills needed aren't at all advanced; but I'm not going to do it because you give me no evidence for it. (I could google for evidence, but I plead laziness.) Please make the suggestion, citing a reliable source, at the foot of Talk:Grace Lee Whitney. -- Hoary (talk) 23:42, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! IMDb lists Kraft Suspense Theatre and 50 other credits that aren't on the Grace Lee Whitney article. However, IMDb is not considered reliable because the content is user generated. I suggest you post on the article's talk page Talk:Grace Lee Whitney do see what consensus they have for which roles get included in the Filmography section. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:59, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Page declined

FYI

– Heading added by Tenryuu.

I want detailed imformation that why this page is declined https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Brij_Kishore_Sharma please reply in easy language why this page has been declined 49.36.45.121 (talk) 14:25, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. As the reviewer states, the draft doesn't satisfy one of Wikipedia's notability guidelines (WP:NAUTHOR), as Sharma would require significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject and are secondary sources. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

FYI - page is now gone due to editors having been blocked. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 01:12, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Quoting and full stop/period

Not new here, wanted to ask if we include the full stop/period inside the quote or outside the quote if what I'm quoting is a full sentence? For example: "abc...xyz.". or "abc...xyz". which is correct or there is a case-by-case basis? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 02:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: Welcome to the Teahouse! See MOS:INOROUT for lots of examples. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Thanks you for the reply. Happy editing! — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 02:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Will adding to a draft that is pending review slow down the review process?

Hello, I've created a page and submitted it for review, but there is much more to add. Can I keep adding to the draft without losing my place in the queue? Or is it better to wait for the draft to be approved before making any more changes?

This is the page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Angelina_Pwerle Akkeri (talk) 04:40, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Akkeri: Welcome to the Teahouse! The message on the yellow draft template stating "drafts are reviewed in no specific order" is intended to let you know that there is no queue. Yes, you can keep working on the draft while you're waiting for it to be reviewed. In the first paragraph you mention "Kathleen Ngale", and I was very confused: Is Angelina also known by Kathleen? Is there a typo? Then the "Life" section tells me that Kathleen is Angelina's sister. But then back to the third sentence, "her work is held": is "her" Angelina or Kathleen? I hope you can reorganize the draft to make this more clear. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:56, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thanks for the prompt response and for explaining the process! Yes, it's a typo... I will continue editing! Akkeri (talk)

Akkeri, genuine, substantive improvements to a draft improve its prospects for a quicker review; they do not slow it down. To repeat, there is no queue. Reviewers select drafts to review based on their own personal interests and expertise, and their first impression of the quality of the draft, not based on any type of queue. Every reviewer just loves to approve well-written, fully policy compliant drafts. Resolve the confusion between the two sisters described by GoingBatty above. That sort of thing is a major red flag for reviewers. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:08, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Got it, thanks. I will continue editing! Akkeri (talk)

How to

How to post Knowledgeble content and inspiration stories to beneficial for individual or communities Vinaychoudharyofficial (talk) 08:11, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Vinaychoudharyofficial Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. One of your edits was reverted for being promotional- promotion and advertising are not permitted on Wikipedia. Please read about the Five Pillars and use the Wikipedia adventure to learn more about what Wikipedia is and what we do here. 331dot (talk) 08:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Vinaychoudharyofficial, this is an encyclopedia. It presents factual information to its readers. It's factual in that it's based on reliable, independent sources. This factual information may inspire its readers or it may do the reverse; "inspiration stories" are not what an encyclopedia is about. It's also not for advertising yourself or anyone or anything else. Please start by making minor additions and corrections to articles that already exist, always clearly citing your (reliable, independent) sources. -- Hoary (talk) 08:21, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Repeating Dates

Should repetitive dates (As of [Date], such is true...) be updated daily, or just with new sources in terms of new/high importance articles? The question is for Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan–United States relations. There are a few dates in the article like the US not recognizing IEA as a country/government yet that start with "As of (date)", and I want to know how often to update those dates. Elijahandskip (talk) 03:07, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you update the date as often as you update the reliable source for the sentence. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:12, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Elijahandskip, there cannot possibly be a universal standard and obviously this article is an exceptionally prominent article now. It depends entirely on how often reliable sources update the specific information, and how motivated editors are to update properly. I was editing a related article that contained the death count from the Surfside condominium collapse about two months ago. Initially, the confirmed death count was increasing frequently, and editing of the article was frenzied as well. The time came when the count of 98 dead stabilized, the most obvious information stabilized, and editing of the article declined significantly, although I am sure that improvements will be made for years to come. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:38, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: I am a bit confused here. I am no expert on topic bans, but isn't that article pretty clearly related to post-1992 US politics, which you are tbanned from? --bonadea contributions talk 08:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Changes in wiki - when can I expect the changes to be visible?

Hi, when I make a change in wiki, do you then know when I can expect the changes to be visible in our Google company add (placed right side) when a company name is searched? Can I do something so the changes will be visible right away in the Google add? Berbel Bruun Hansen (talk) 09:45, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

The speed with which Google responds is down to them, not to Wikipedia. I see from this edit that you are making edits on behalf of the company. You therefore need to read about conflict of interest, and you must make the mandatory declaration of paid editing. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:59, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

My contribution to the article Tenor horn is being continuously erased

My contribution to the article "Tenor horn" is being constantly erased

I agree that my first few attempts to edit a section in the site named "Tenor Horn" were disruptive, due to my indignation. But after I read your notices to me, I crafted my last version which is pasted below. It too was erased, which implies that no matter what I post on the theme of tenor horn, they will keep erasing, because someone is irritated with the fact that I am expressing a different opinion. Freedom of expression can always be suppressed under the pretext of "offensive language". Please, tell me what is disruptive in the paragraph below:

"The tenor horn (It. Corno di tenore; Ger. Bassflugelhorn) – it is an instrument in B-flat. Tenors and baritones are alike, they are both in B-flat, have the same range, and may substitute for each other. The difference lies in the slightly larger bore of the baritone, which also affects the timbre. The tenor horn shall not be confused with an alto horn (It. Flicorno alto; Ger. Althorn), which is in E-flat and much smaller in size. The latter corresponds to the French horn in E-flat, still traditionally used on some European wind orchestras. To summarize, the tenor and baritone horns correspond to the tenor/baritone voice in the choir, while the alto horn corresponds to the alto voice. A short informative video from the Prince Regent’s Band: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78qCc9xk18Q"

Thank you. I wish you well, and I look forward to hearing from you. I hope you will allow this passage to be inserted into the Tenor horn article.

Best

Mutaeditor Mutaeditor (talk) 20:49, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mutaeditor, hello, I haven’t read anything meticulously but I can give you a blanket response, you see, if you add something to an article and it is removed multiple times chances are what you may be adding is already in the article or your input may not be deemed constructive, not too worry we all went through that phase in your spare time you can read WP:CTW. Celestina007 (talk) 21:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mutaeditor basically you're getting reverted because, so far as I can see, you're wrong. Everyone apart from the Germans seems to have a horn in E-flat, which some call a tenor horn, and some call an alto horn, and which is the subject of the article. The Germans also have a horn in B-flat which they call a tenorhorn, which means some people refer to a horn in B-flat as a "German tenor horn" (e.g here [6]), but everyone else calls a B-flat baritone. The best I can think is this: nomenclature of brass instruments is such a hideous mess that no one outside the brass world really has the foggiest idea what's going on (and quite a few people inside the brass world would feel equally befuddled). For those of us who play sensible, non-transposing instruments, we just shake our heads in disbelief and ignore these strange metal items. So what Wikipedia probably greatly needs is this: an article on the nomenclature of brass instruments, explaining the potential confusions. We have an article on Brass_instrument but it doesn't really tackle the full name-and-pitch issue. Maybe get some talk-page discussion going, and see if there is such an article (it's just I haven't found it), or if there isn't, see if anyone is interested in collaborating with you to make one? Elemimele (talk) 22:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Lots of good points here. I have tried, quite nicely I hoped, to explain about WP:ENGVAR and the way that one person's terminology may not suit another, and how we try to work together on it, but I am not sure I have been heard. So, here is Sheona White, an eminent player of the tenor horn, in E-flat, in British English (BrE). Here is a shop selling tenor horns, in E-flat, also in BrE. We bought about 40 of those: they are quite good. Tenor Horns. In E-flat. I teach tenor horn, in E-flat, in BrE, to about 40 children, and if I were playing in the wrong key I might perhaps have noticed by now (or maybe not) but then I am not an RS, am I? And yes it's a horrible terminological mess and wildly inconsistent across the globe, but the article was coping with it quite well until this B-flat crusade started. Best wishes to all, DBaK (talk) 22:53, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mutaeditor: Welcome to the Teahouse! Thank you for your efforts to improve the Tenor horn article. Unfortunately, having an edit reverted can be a common experience on Wikipedia. Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, your best next step is to have a conversation like the one above on the article's talk page: Talk:Tenor horn. There will be additional knowledgeable editors who monitor that talk page that don't come to the Teahouse. Thanks to those who contributed to the conversation above. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:29, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, all. None of this seems to be working all that well so far and Mutaeditor has not yet visited Talk:Tenor horn; I am not sure why – it could look like they prefer to ignore discussion that does not suit their, er, weltanschauung. (Altanschauung? Tenoranschauung??) but maybe that is just not fair of me, looking at what is written just above here by me and others. They've made (on their own Talk) a couple of not-really-accurate claims about what has happened in discussions so far but I thinkhope that this is probably from unfamiliarity with our (admittedly Baroque, not in a good way) systems rather than deliberately misleading. If they do ever turn up at Talk:Tenor horn then I will attempt politely to engage; if they just make the same edits again without consensus then it is looking like >3RR; I am not going to pursue it otherwise, here or anywhere. I absolutely do not want to be unkind or unhelpful and I have tried to be as positive as possible, given my view of their desired change, but there is a limit to these things. Thanks and best to all DBaK (talk) 13:11, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Redirects

Why are there so many random redirects in articles? [7] ― Qwerfjkl talk 12:08, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

In the case of Panama Wedding, Qwerfjkl, because an IP user added them in this edit last December, apparently under the impression that that was how you create a Wikilink. I have corrected that article, but I haven't looked further. That particular IP address did not appear to have made the same mistake elsewhere at that time: I'd guess that some of the others were the same editor using a different IP address, but it may be other editors sharing the same misapprehension. --ColinFine (talk) 13:47, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Lancaster City FC

Hi, I'm hoping you can help me. For around 14 years I have been editing and updating the page on Lancaster City F.C. albeit anonymously. As a lifelong supporter I've updated and edited the page regularly. However, recently a registered user who goes by the name of Seasider53 has been deleting large sections of the page, sections that have been there for years. I've since created an account but the page has now been protected and as such I can't access the page to edit it. It seems very petty as the page was there to provide football supporters with up to date information regarding Lancaster City F.C. Please can you help as I've spent years keeping this page updated only for some jobsworth keyboard warrior, with no links to Lancaster City I would imagine, to come along and wantonly vandalise and ruin what was a very informative article. DoctorJimmy123DoctorJimmy123 (talk) 12:17, 30 August 2021 (UTC) DoctorJimmy123 (talk) 12:17, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Lancaster City FC. DoctorJimmy123, the editor Seasider53 is not disputing the content, only that it exists without a reference to verify that it is true. What you know to be true is not sufficient, nor is how long content has been in an article. Repetition of reverting changes is called 'edit warring', and can lead to a temporary block. The proper option is to make your case on the Talk page of the article, with reliable source references. Invite Seasider53. If a consensus can be reached, then that editor or another will restore the content to the article. Lastly, but essentially - contest content, but do not insult editors. A disagreement on content does not constitute vandalism, which within Wikipedia has a specific definition. David notMD (talk) 12:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

If you wait 4 days and do 10 edits, you will be able to edit the article. You can place edit requests on the article's talk page in the meantime. Alternatively, you can ask for the confirmed permission at WP:PERM/C, and explain your situation and history of editing. ― Qwerfjkl talk 12:39, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

It was pointed out at User talk:95.150.221.4 and at User talk:95.151.172.200 that you must not include content without citing WP:reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:52, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks guys I really appreciate your advice. However I can't get over how petty this is, and inconsistent as well. Surely if all this is about is reference sources then wouldn't it have been better just to have deleted the whole article instead of picking and choosing which sections. And then surely the right thing to do would be to go onto every English non League football club page on Wikipedia and delete ALL the sections that are unsourced, of which there are thousands? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DoctorJimmy123 (talk • contribs)

Yes. please list those here. Less sarcastically, with over 6,000,000 English language articles, there are tens if not hundreds of thousands that do not meet current standards. Many are so flawed that they deserve nomination for deletion. P.S. remember to sign comments. David notMD (talk) 13:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@DoctorJimmy123: In case you haven't seen it before, Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues keeps a list of fully professional football leagues worldwide, so a team in those leagues would be presumed as notable. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:50, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Doctor Jimmy comes and goes under various accounts. Back in 2007, during the lifespan of one of those accounts, this was the state of the Lancaster City F.C. article. Not a single reference in sight. 14 years later, I'm still trying to get the message across to him. - Seasider53 (talk) 13:59, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

If you are Doctor Jimmy, you are reminded of Wikipedia's rules about the use of multiple accounts. David Biddulph (talk) 14:06, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

A help

Hi. I want to make uncollapsible section in mobile view. I want to uncollapsible it but the heading of sections must have the horizontal line. Waiting for reply! Thanks. ➤ Tajwar – thesupermaN! ^{【Click to Discuss】} 05:49, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Tajwar.thesuperman Hello and welcome to the Tea House! Can you link a specific Wikipedia Article you have this issue with? If I am understand you correctly, there is no easy way to prevent sections from being automatically collapsed. An alternative, would be to use the "desktop" version of the website on your mobile device. On the bottom of any page is an option to select "Desktop" version. @Cullen328 has written an essay about this and mobile editing more broadly which you can read here: User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing. Happy editing! ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 08:30, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

In addition to the above, some mobile web browsers have the option to force the page into desktop mode. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 15:04, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Marking errors for others to fix?

So, I was skimming through the Norwegian page on Transhumance, and noticed an error. I tried reading the english version and googling a bit, but I realize I don't have time for this right now, and I'm ADHD/I have too low interest in this topic to find the answer anytime soon. D:

Is there a way to mark/tag this page/sentence so that other editors who might be better suited for the task hopefully will see this sooner?

Thanks. SkoolWasaB (talk) 15:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Tea House! Unfortunately templates are usually unique to each language edition of Wikipedia. For English Wikipedia you can check out the various templates here: Template:Cleanup template documentation see also section generic list. For other language Wikipedias, the simplest step would be to write a comment on the "Discussion" page, happy editing! Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

The spritual realmi

119.2.118.110 (talk) 16:11, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Did you have a question about editing Wikipedia? - David Biddulph (talk) 16:12, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Category: artists who paint birds

Am I crazy, or is this a stupid category?: Category:New Zealand bird artists.

The three current artists seem to predominantly paint birds, and are of course best known for painting birds, but there are (surprisingly) many New Zealand artists who are best known for their work on birds. Of course, most of the other candidates (eg, Don Binney) are known to work on other subjects, but what is the cutoff mark? I'm somewhat new to categories in general, so I'm not sure if this is a stupid question or one that's been rehashed a ton before. Many thanks! — HTGS (talk) 14:24, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@HTGS Hello and welcome to Tea House, this sounds like a case of WP:NARROWCAT. You could nominate the Category for discussion over at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:21, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

how to

Help Bot2213 (talk) 18:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse. Is your question related to your username warning or one of the articles you recently edited? Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 19:00, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Why

why Ayomuchachos (talk) 18:14, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Why not? Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 18:17, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Because.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:28, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Uh... ain't nothing but heartache? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 18:33, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

See Why. David notMD (talk) 18:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Zee (or Zed). GoingBatty (talk) 19:08, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Ayomuchachos In all seriousness, every one of your edits except this one has been reverted. You are close to getting blocked, as you've been warned on your talk page. WP:NOTHERE. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

"Education" or "alma mater"?

While browsing the wikipedia pages of various notables, I see in their little infobox that the term "education" is used about 90% of the time in describing the notable's alumni status, while the term "alma mater" is used the other 10% of the time to describe the same thing. Which term should be used? Are they both ok? Should we actively edit one to make it the other? Please let me know. Samuuurai (talk) 04:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Samuuurai, welcome to the Teahouse! Quoting from Template:Infobox person:

Education, e.g., degree, institution and graduation year, if relevant. If very little information is available or relevant, the |alma_mater= parameter may be more appropriate.
Alma mater. This parameter is a more concise alternative to (not addition to) |education=, and will often consist of the linked name of the last-attended institution of higher education (not secondary schools). It is usually not relevant to include either parameter for non-graduates, but article talk page consensus may conclude otherwise, as perhaps at Bill Gates.

Hope that helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

I see more use of alma_mater than education, but that's pertaining to television actors and folks not in academia/research. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:42, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Changed birth date - reliable source?

hi! Im new here, I changed birth date from Jessie Reyez from 13 to 12, as this is the information I can find on her. But not sure if this source is reliable enough?

https://www.allmusic.com/artist/jessie-reyez-mn0003564213/biography

I could not find any linked source that confirmed the date should be 13.

Would love your help learning how you would act in this situation and if I edited correctly?

Netanya9 (talk) 11:15, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Netanya9 (talk) 11:13, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

If you are not sure/cannot find a reliable source confirming her date of birth, then omit it. ― Qwerfjkl talk 12:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

- Thank you. The date was already there, felt inappropriate to delete birth date? And I did find a source, just not sure if Wiki considers it reliable? Netanya9 (talk) 12:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Netnaya9: You can check WP:RSP#Sources and if it's not there you can discuss it at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to make sure it's reliable or not. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 15:02, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Netanya9@Blaze The Wolf when in doubt about information that is potentially wrong or undue in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, delete it! It can always be re-added once consensus/appriate sources are added. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you @shushugah I see you deleted! :) Made note on talkpage. Netanya9 (talk) 20:04, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

how can I publish a new page?

Hi I'm new to Wikipedia, I create a new page today and I can't see it when I search in the google. What's the procedure? Will it get automatically published later? Vinul Fernando (talk) 17:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! We're glad you're here. ~~New articles often take weeks or months to appear in Google search results, depending on when the article is indexed by the search engine.~~ See DavidnotMD's comment below. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 18:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Vinul Fernando::Confirming you created Lal Fernando today. Parts are not referenced, especially awards, so continue to improve it. My understanding is that a new article must either be reviewed by New Pages Patrol or 90 days must occur before opened to search engines such as Google. However, if searched within Wikipedia, it will be seen. Question to you: did you in fact take the photograph used in the article? Second question: Are you related or connected to Lal Fernando? David notMD (talk) 18:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Vinul Fernando, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. New articles are not indexed by search engines until they have been patrolled (or for 90 days if they don't get patrolled in that time).

Well done for creating a good-looking article as a new editor; but unfortunately, I'm not sure that you have established that Lal Fernando meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, since most of the references appear to be from the army, or other institutions that Fernando is part of. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

You created that article by copying the content of your sandbox: this is not the best way to move a page: moving the sandbox would be better; but better still, especially for a new editor, would have been to submit the draft for review. I also notice that your user name suggests you may be connected with Fernando. If that is the case, please read about editing with a conflict of interest, and declare your status. --ColinFine (talk) 18:39, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the tips everyone! To answer David notMD, the photograph took from the one of the references and I'm aware of the copyright issues. I'll remove and change it. And yes the article is about my farther.--Vin97 18:50, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Vinul Fernando: The issues are worse than ColinFine mentioned, as 6 of the 7 references do not seem to mention your father at all. The purpose of the references is to show where you read the information. Anything about your father that cannot be verified in a reliable published source needs to be removed. GoingBatty (talk) 18:57, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Moved to Draft:Lal Fernando. Vinul has declared COI (draft about his father). David notMD (talk) 21:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Did not leave an edit revert summary

I reverted an edit for Campaign to Electrify Britain’s Railways back to UK English but golden rule is always leave an edit summary ESPECIALLY for a revert. I did not do this. Is there a way to correct my rookie error please? GRALISTAIR (talk) 21:39, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

You could make a follow-up WP:DUMMY edit with an explanation "my previous revert was because blah blah blah" Leijurv (talk) 21:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorted thanks GRALISTAIR (talk) 02:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Miss michigan teen usa PAGE

Winner 2020 "aneesa sheikh" her correct age was 17 when she won... the current age is incorrect as it states she was 18, when she was 17. Sharkqueque (talk) 01:48, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Sharkqueque: Welcome to the Teahouse! Thank you for your desire to make Wikipedia better! I suggest you post your edit request on the article's talk page - Talk:Miss Michigan Teen USA - along with a reliable source for her age at the time she won. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

How to create a Biography Page

Hi, I am trying to create a biography page that I can edit and am confused on how to do it. However when I put in the code (subst:Biography) I don't get an edit button to be able to format and change what needs to be changed.

Also, just to clarify when you create a page will it be checked before it's published or once it is created and edit it can you just publish it?

Is there a instruction step by step guide on how to do this? Carolina Ski (talk) 22:11, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Carolina Ski Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating a new article (not just a "page") is probably the hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. It takes much time, effort, and practice. It's usually recommended that users spend much time editing existing articles first, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. I'd suggest using the new user tutorial.

You may visit Articles for creation to create and submit a draft for review. You will want to gather at least three independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject to summarize.(not brief mentions, press releases, interviews, or any materials put out by the person) You will want to make sure the person meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person(or one of the more specific definitions for certain career fields). 331dot (talk) 22:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Carolina Ski: Welcome to the Teahouse! Two more great resources are Help:Your first article and the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

If you want to invoke the relevant templates with the string "subst:Biography" you need to put it inside curly brackets, thus "{{subst:Biography}}". --David Biddulph (talk) 05:51, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Creating a Norwegian Wikipedia site

Hi, I wish to create a Norwegian wiki page so I can refer to Norwegian references without using a interøanguage link. How do I proceed to make a NO page and how do I save my draft in the sandbox without publishing? I don't see a save button. Have also tried to create a userspace without understanding how to save.

Thanks in advance!

Best May MaySundAnd (talk) 08:37, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@MaySundAnd: "Publish changes" means "save changes", not "publish this to the encyclopedia". The button is labeled this way to remind you that everything here is public, if one knows where to look for. If you want to create a Wikipedia article in norwegian, you have to do so at the norwegian Wikipedia. Their pendant of our Help:Your first article seems to be no:Wikipedia:Din første artikkel Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:46, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@MaySundAnd: note that there are two "Norwegian" wikipedias: the Bokmål one at no.wikipedia.org and the Nynorsk one at nn.wikipedia.org, so you need to choose your dialect/political leaning! Peter coxhead (talk) 09:18, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick and informative reply ::@Peter coxhead:. The reason I asked about the "publish changes"/how to save is that I have gotten a note that I/the person I write the article about, might be blacklisted on Wikipedia for publishing too many times. However, I have only sent the article to review 1 time. So that's why I am nervous about this. Is there anyone I can contact to make sure to not get blacklisted? If it has been published several times it must have been a mistake from my side, but as mentioned I have only sent it to review once.

Best May

Hello, MaySundAnd. It sounds as if you're talking about an article that has been salted: this happens on repeated attempts to create an article that are all unacceptable, usually because the subject fails to meet the criteria for notability. But if more material is published, so that the subject does now meet these criteria, then it is fine to create a draft and submit it for review: if the reviewer agrees that the subject is now notable, they can arrange for the salting to be removed and the article accepted. It's worth looking at the deletion discussion(s) for previous attempts, to make sure that you are addressing the reasons why it got deleted - you can find them at Special:log/delete. (All that I've written relates to English Wikipedia: the Norwegian ones may or may not be the same in these respects). --ColinFine (talk) 12:30, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Just to add re your comment "can refer to Norwegian references" - it is perfectly acceptable to use non English references here on the English language Wikipedia. Ϣere SpielChequers 09:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Need help finding content

Good day. I am conducting a large amount of historical research and consult Wikipedia quite often because I find their media of World maps depicting territory and Empire boundary changes through each decade incredibly helpful forming a mental picture of the time period I am researching. To make things easier for myself I have been trying to locate an archive of all such media so that I can browse through maps and conduct research more quickly. Does such an archive exist, and if so how and where can I locate?

Thank you,

Carrow Carrow94 (talk) 02:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Carrow94: You might have luck asking on the talk page of the Maps Wikiproject. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 02:49, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Carrow94, and welcome to the Teahouse. Timtempleton has suggested one approach. Another is to find some appropriate categories on Wikimedia Commons (which is where most of the maps are hosted). Examples are Commons:Category:Maps of the history of Europe by former country and Commons:Category:Maps of empires. --ColinFine (talk) 09:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Article Levels?

Hi! I was researching Thomas Sankara and noticed that at the bottom of the talk page, it said "List of Level-4 Articles in People.

What is a level-4 article? Are there more levels? Level-4 goes from Sankara to Neil Armstrong to the founder of the Baha'i Faith. How are articles ranked? The Voivodeship King (talk) 10:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, The Voivodeship King. There's an essay on article assessment you might like to read. Detailed criteria are usually set by the Projects interested in given articles (see on their Talk Pages). Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:41, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Post Deletion Follow-Up

Hello,

I am reaching out to confirm a bit more clarification on Nedra Tawwab's article that was denied. The article was written in suggested format as requested by Wikipedia and was structured similar to many of her colleagues that have approved Wikipedia articles. If we can get a more understanding or recommended advice on what should be updated in the article that would be helpful. We appreciate your guidance in advance. 2600:8801:DE00:BD:70B5:130C:424F:EBB2 (talk) 00:13, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Does the draft still exist? Name? Or was it Speedy deleted, leaving no trace? David notMD (talk) 02:15, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I assume this refers to Draft:Nedra Tawwab, which was speedy deleted under G11 on the 28th. Victor Schmidt (talk) 05:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I used my admin tools to look at the deleted page, it was blatant spam, nothing worth saving. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

The fact that similar articles exist on Wikipedia is not an accepted rationale for a contested article. There are tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of articles that do not meet current standards, either because those were created years ago, or editors created the articled without going through the Articles for Creation review process. David notMD (talk) 11:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

need help with rot link

Could someone please help me with this rot link (ref 9) on Marie Forleo page? https://www.girlboss.com/read/marie-forleo-podcast-interview

I tried Wayback Machine, doesn't seem to work, but not sure if Im doing it right. I understand we can not delete the rotten link, so what should I do? Thank you! Netanya9 (talk) 08:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I find this help with references. You can tag it with {{dead link}}. ― Qwerfjkl talk 08:13, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Netanya9: The dead URL is supporting the sentence "Forleo hosts and stars in MarieTV, a YouTube web series, and The Marie Forleo Podcast." A quick Google search should find an up-to-date reference (or references) you can use that MarieTV and the podcast exist. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

2^64-1 Proven NOT prime about 1902. Cannot find the reference. Would like to see it added to powers of 2 page. or primes page.

see headline. Randycorvette (talk) 14:39, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Randycorvette: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for wanting to make it better. Anything you add to the article needs to have a reference, so if there is no reference for the new info you want to add, it can't be added. RudolfRed (talk) 15:04, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Randycorvette: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can post your suggestion on the article's talk page (e.g. Talk:Power of two), and other editors can help determine if it would be a good addition and help find a reliable source. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:13, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

If you read Mersenne prime you'll find the general case. 2^n-1 can't be prime unless n is prime and even then most cases (e.g. n=11) are not primes. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:21, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

It might be, however, that this was not known in 1902, and that M_64 being not prime was a historical advance then. Without a ref, we will never know though...Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 17:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Randycorvette: Were you thinking about

M 67

? No factor of that was found until Frank Nelson Cole showed them in 1903? See Cole, F. N. (1 December 1903). "On the factoring of large numbers". Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society. 10 (3): 134–138. doi:10.1090/S0002-9904-1903-01079-9..

M 64

is obviously composite since it = (2³²)² - 1^2,=(2³² + 1)(2³² - 1). Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:26, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

even more obviously, 2⁶⁴ is 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 — which means that (2⁶⁴-1) is 18,446,744,073,709,551,615. DS (talk) 03:35, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

For all positive n, 2⁴ⁿ must be 6 modulo 10, so 2⁴ⁿ-1 must be a multiple of 5. Maproom (talk) 07:14, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

and more generally, for any n>1, 2²ⁿ-1 = (2ⁿ+1)(2ⁿ-1) and so is not prime. This should have been obvious to any competent number theorist long before 1900. Maproom (talk) 13:28, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I am in Extreme Problem

I am in extreme problem Please I beg you please read this full I am Harsh Vardhan Sharma "Tara" I have created many articles for my father, at that time when I was a kid, so I don't know about refrencing, but this time i got all reliable referencing content but I have blocked by other users because when I was kid I don't know about refrencing and after I know about referencing so I create a wikipedia page for my father who is politician but whenever I submit it for review users delete the page which has good reference and good article but they remove it because i am a blocked and banned user but at that time I don't know about the blocking policy so I create many articles for my father but this time I have reliable references but whenever I create the page in good faith then they delete it so what i do please answer what i have do i have been indefinitely blocked from wikipedia without an expiry set so please help me how to make a wikipedia page for dad Please help me to create wikipedia page I have never abuse Wikipedia I only want to add my father's name in wikipedia who is politician but that time I have nothing for refrence but this time I have so please help me to create page for my father please I beg you that time I was kid so I mistakenly abuse wikipedia by adding my father name many times without any refrences so please help me please sir47.247.196.235 (talk) 13:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC) 47.247.196.235 (talk) 13:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

You have asked the same question at WP:Help desk. Please don't ask the same question in multiple places as it wastes the time of vounteers answering questions which have already been answered. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:50, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Writing about your family members is an inherent conflict of interest - please don't do it. If your father is genuinely notable according to our notability criteria for politicians, then someone else who doesn't have a personal or professional connection to him will eventually write an article about him. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Your only option to be able to do any article editing or creation is start at User talk:HARSH VARDHAN SHARMA "TARA" and appeal your block. Every time you try to create an article about your father, either as a new account or not registered, is more reason why your block will not be lifted. Until you succeed in appealing your block, no one will help you, and all attempts to evade the block will be vanished without a trace. David notMD (talk) 18:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Note: He will not be able to edit User talk:HARSH VARDHAN SHARMA "TARA" at any time soon, because the account is globally locked as a lock evasion of Wikibot Research of Reverted Edits (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email). He would need to appeal the global lock first. Victor Schmidt (talk) 21:13, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Wow! Twelve confirmed sockpuppet accounts!! David notMD (talk) 21:21, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

And you can also add 49.35.250.10. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:35, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I add it to get help from wikipedia49.35.250.10 (talk) 11:43, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Add also User:Indian Wiki User CG, not yet identified as a new sock. David notMD (talk) 14:06, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I am convinced some people just can not understand the rules no matter what is said and they will continue to be disruptive no matter how many people try to explain it. It's not an assumption of bad faith because they are not acting from a place of bad faith intentions so much as lacking the ability to comprehend and critically evaluate/process the rules here specifically. Nor can they understand the difference between gratis versus libre and free speech. --ARose Wolf 14:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Syed Hasan Askari, historian

Recently someone deleted the article for this subject citing it was a dup of Muhammad Madni Ashraf Ashrafi Al-Jilani, which is puzzling. Professor Syed Hasan Askari and Muhammad Madni Ashraf Ashrafi Al Jilani are two different individuals with no similarities as per their biographies on official website, Sufinama and Wikipedia. Prof. Askari was born in 1901 in Bihar, India while the other one in Utter Pradash, India in 1938. Their photographs are different. One is a historian of medieval India while the later is a religious scholar. Who do I contact for this as the editor who deleted the page does not respond? 174.87.228.255 (talk) 14:16, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! It appears that the Syed Hasan Askari still exists. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:38, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

It appears a user requested a speedy deletion, however MaterialScientist (i think that's their username) reverted it as it constituted vandalism. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 14:41, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Actually, it appears the speedy deletion was in good faith as a now blocked user turned that article into a copy of Muhammad Madni Ashraf Ashrafi Al-Jilani ~~that's a mouthful~~ which has since been reverted. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 14:44, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Looking at the log, the article Syed Hasan Askari was indeed deleted as duplicate by Materialscientist on Aug 24, and restored today (Aug 31) when you brought it to their attention on their talk page. The history of the page looks messy, so I am ready to believe their explanation (the page was turned into a duplicate, then nominated for deletion, which they granted without checking the history carefully).

If the timestamps are correct, they replied to you within seven minutes after you left the talk page message, so it is a bit unfair to say that "the editor who deleted the page does not respond". Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:47, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Article Declined // Mosquito Bites

Hello, I was wondering why my article was declined under the reason that it does not qualify for a Wikipedia article, with the decliner saying "There's already a section on bites. Please discuss on the talk page whether it needs to be a split article." Usually, insect bites earn their own articles, such as bee stings, which has an article and a section on the main page. After an exchange with the person who declined it, they suggested I consult the mosquito talk page, whose questions don't get answered often. I'm not sure what to do now, as the creator for the bee sting article never had to ask permission on the bee talk page despite very similar situations. Please help me resolve this issue.

Thank you, Eye ay en (talk) 03:40, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Ian, although you say that "Usually, insect bites earn their own articles", I see no evidence for this when I look in Category:Insect bites and stings. Insect bites and stings is a short article that could easily be expanded. If you'd like to ask about it, try Talk:Insect bites and stings; if there's no reaction after a week, try inviting people there from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Dermatology task force. -- Hoary (talk) 04:51, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Eye ay en @Hoary There is Bee sting, Spider bite (not an insect I know I know) and Bed bug which are almost exclusively about bites. I also think articles like Malaria may be worth looking into. I agree that Insect bites and stings would likely be overwhelmed with a huge mosquito section and Hoary's advice is really good. Seems some people mixe up Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers with Wikipedia:Please bite the newbies 😬 ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 08:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. Are you saying I should add my article to Insect bites and stings? Or argue for it at the talk page of insect bites and stings

--Eye ay en (talk) 05:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Eye ay en, I was going to recommend the former; but then I looked at your draft (for the first time) and realized that it's quite long, so it would rather overpower the article Insect bites and stings. I wondered about putting it into the article Mosquito, but then looked at that (again for the first time) and realized that it's very long and that there's quite some overlap with what you've written. Frankly I'm not entirely sure what's best; but this may be obvious to somebody who, unlike me, knows about entomology, dermatology, or preferably both. On balance, though, I agree with AngusWOOF. What I am certain about is that this needs more work. In this edit, I've just looked at the introduction, primarily removing internal links. Once you've linked to, say, Mosquito, you don't need to do so a second time in the same section, or perhaps anywhere. Also, if somebody's reading about mosquito bites, it's unlikely that when they come across mention of (linked) September they'll think "Ah yes, September! I've always wondered about that. Let's find out more"; and therefore it doesn't need to be linked. Depending on the context, some terms and concepts cry out to be linked, some absolutely don't; the border is very fuzzy and I doubt that AngusW (for example) would delete exactly the same links that I did, but my guess is that he'd have deleted a lot. I've also amateurishly tried to neutralize an instance of what looked like (absent-minded) temperate-northern-hemisphere-centrism. (This of course can be a danger of dependence on US, Canadian, Irish, British, etc sources intended for "domestic" consumption.) Please keep working on your draft, and then people will be more inclined either to shovel parts of it into the Mosquito article or to promote it to the status of freestanding article. -- Hoary (talk) 07:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I was mainly asking for it to be discussed as a split out of the material since Mosquito bite currently redirects there. If there is consensus that it should be its own article, then it can be created. Whether it's discussed at Mosquito or Insect bites and stings or WP:INSECT or the draft doesn't matter. It can be somewhat paintful, but doable, as done with splitting out dog harness from Pet harness. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 14:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

I think it's a promising draft and could easily be its own article. Eye ay en, don't be discouraged. Creating an article from scratch is a very difficult task for a new editor, and it sometimes takes some time. —valereee (talk) 15:40, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Help needed at Kataklik Kangri

Hello. I just created a page for Kataklik Kangri - a group of two mountain peaks located in Aksai Chin/Ladakh. But, I am only able to add one peak's coordinates in the infobox? Is there any way around? RPSkokie (talk) 13:07, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@RPSkokie: Hi there! Looking at Template:Infobox mountain, it appears there's only one parameter for |coordinates= and one parameter for |range_coordinates= (along with a corresponding reference parameter for each). If you don't receive a response to your post at Talk:Kataklik Kangri or here, you may wish to ask at Template talk:Infobox mountain. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty thanks for the help. But even if I use the range coordinates I am getting this error - coordinates cannot have more than one primary tag per page. I want two separate peaks of the same range to be incorporated in the infobox. RPSkokie (talk) 04:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty I used - OSM Location map infobox - within the body of the article. Earlier I used it at Shigatse Peace Airport's page. Does this kind of editing comply with Wikipedia rules? RPSkokie (talk) 04:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@RPSkokie: I looked at Template:OSM Location map and Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Conventions/Location maps and Wikipedia:WikiProject OpenStreetMap and don't see any restrictions on where the map can be used. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 12:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty thank you for helping! RPSkokie (talk) 16:30, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Propose deletion of page on Spanish Wikipedia

Hello hosts, do the same WP:HOWTODELETE instructions apply for proposing deletion of a page on the Spanish version of Wikipedia? Or do I have to set up the deletion 'tag' in Spanish? The page in question is https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ollie_Wride. The articles used as references for this page are not strong candidates to show notability and in my mind require several in-depth pieces from independent, reliable sources to show it passes either WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. I am a noob around here but I am passionate about correct representation of synthwave music artists in the wiki space. Thisismeandhistory (talk) 16:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Thisismeandhistory. The Teahouse provides information about editing the English Wikipedia only. You will have to ask questions about editing the Spanish Wikipedia at that project, which has its own standards. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:56, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thisismeandhistory, I don't speak Spanish, but you might find their AFD page helpful - looks like they follow a similar process to the English Wikipedia. I'd suggest finding a bilingual partner there, as you won't be able to argue effectively unless you're fluent in Spanish as well. es:Wikipedia:Café appears to be their version of the teahouse, a good place to start. ASUKITE 17:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Super thank you both for the quick responses.Thisismeandhistory (talk) 17:06, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

How to using Wikipedia

How to cheat on Wikipedia during exam so you don't get caught? 36.80.195.168 (talk) 08:34, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

You don't. There are multiple ways for teachers who know about IT to verify what the students do, including but not limited to simply shutting off the school wifi during exams. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Don't. Do your exam legitimately. You'll learn more from not cheating. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 13:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Trying this will lead to a fail of the test at least and expulsion for academic dishonesty at worst if discovered. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 18:16, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Politicians of ethnic origin categories.

I while back, I decided to create three new categories for American politicians of Asian descent. The ethniitites in question were for Thais, Cambodians, and Bangladeshis. These categories were recently deleted per a consensus from last year. I created these categories because I believe that they will become more relevant I'm the near future as more people of these ethnicities will be elected into office. I thought that, as this will inevitably come to be, more of these categories should be created for the purpose of identifying American people in office of these ethnicities. This was most certainly the case for not only the current Asian Americans categories, but also Hispanic, African, Native, etc. They started off small but then existing or newly created pages were added to them.

One of the main reasons as to why they were deleted was because the groups mentioned do not "constitute a distinct and identifiable group with a specific cultural and political context." However, Cambodians have a very noticeable present in Massachusetts: specifically Lynn and Lowell, the latter of which's population is well over 10% Cambodian. Along with a noticeable presence in Long Beach, California. Bangladeshi Americans make up almost 1,000,000 people in the country according the the latest Census statistics. That is a little less than all of the Pakistani, Hmong, and Taiwanese Americans combined and these three have categories for politicians. Thai, I will admit, does not have that much of a notable presence as the other two. However, I still maintain that this will not be the case in the near future.

If you can please give me good reasons as to why, at the very least, these categories should not be created as of now, I would very much appreciate it as it will help me for future edits. Thank you. GrayEquinox951 (talk) 16:44, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, GrayEquinox951. The Teahouse is really not a good plase to ask people to "give [you] good reasons" why something has happened in a particular area of Wikipedia. I suggest raising this at WP:CFD. --ColinFine (talk) 18:16, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

A Question Regarding Notability

Hi, if the subject of an article doesn't have that many feature articles, but has been cited and interviewed extensively as an expert on a particular subject, does that count toward notability? I am not talking about academics in particular. BettytheBeth (talk) 00:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your question. This is still a big "depends" type question. There is no guideline that coverage must be feature articles, to my knowledge. However, given the many PR and marketing tactics employed for clients to get quotes and interviews, the expert quotes and interviews should probably be organic (unpaid) coverage in reputable publications. Do you have examples? Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 00:27, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Pyrrho the Skeptic:, thanks for responding. Can I add them to the concerned draft's talk page and get back to you on your talk page? I won't be able to do it today and I believe this discussion will be archived by then. BettytheBeth (talk) 00:31, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely. I'm happy to provide my thoughts and/or point you to the next step. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 15:25, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

BettytheBeth, hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your question appears a tad bit too vague and might be open to multiple interpretation so I would define notability for you, articles retained on mainspace are there because they are notable, how do we decide notability? More often that not the answer is found in WP: GNG, the subject the article should possess in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. You may choose to see what constitutes significant coverage in WP:SIGCOV and what constitutes a reliable source see WP:RS. I hope I have been of help if not do allow me know by stating otherwise. Thank you. Celestina007 (talk) 00:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Celestina007:, thanks for the clarification and the welcome. Perhaps it would be better if you and @Pyrrho the Skeptic: could take a look here at Nicole Ellis' talk page. Thank you so much! BettytheBeth (talk) 16:44, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@BettytheBeth: I added a comment on the draft Talk Page. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 18:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Article not indexing on google page

Hey everyone I'm a new wikipedian here. I created an article Rishton Ka Manjha which is not showing on google. Can anyone help me ' খানকির চালে (talk) 17:00, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, খানকির চালে. New articles are not indexed for a Google search until either they have been reviewed by a new page patroller or 90 days has gone by. Please see Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing for complete details. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Cullen328 I think it has been reviewed by an Patroller but still not indexing on google. খানকির চালে (talk) 17:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Then it will be added once Google's cache on their end updates. Just because it'll be indexed doesn't mean it will be indexed immediately given Google's extensive use of caching. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 17:38, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

What's the hurry? Indexing will happen when it happens. Why do you keep posting in different places asking for preferential treatment? --bonadea contributions talk 17:50, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AnonymousIndiaz refers. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:54, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Number of authors in citations

Hello, is there a max amount of authors that are listed automatically using the citation tool? In papers with more authors, usually only the first 12 names are mentioned and hence the "important" last author is omitted. Many thanks for your comments! Best, Quaenuncabibis (talk) 13:24, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Personally, I limit authors shown in the Wikipedia references to six. However, clicking on the link to the journal article will show the full list of authors. People with a research science background will know that the 'senior' author in who's lab the work was conducted is typically the last author. David notMD (talk) 13:39, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD: People with multiple research science backgrounds will also know that the ordering of authors is highly variable depending on the field. Anecdotically, I am the last author out of eleven for a paper from the lab where I did my bachelor’s internship (one and a half month of undergrad-level work). The ordering in that field / journal was "most work goes first". Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:35, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

My grad and post-doc publications (late 70's, early 80's) were also "most work goes first." On a few, the articles ended up with an extra name in the middle of a researcher visiting from Europe, because that person had done a similar favor for the senior person in our lab group during a visit to Europe. David notMD (talk) 20:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Publish Saaki page

Why page on Saaki is been deleted? It should be there. IAmSaaki (talk) 20:26, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@IAmSaaki: Saaki has been deleted, amongst other reasons, becuase it was a copypaste of a coprighted internet site. If you are this person, read WP:AUTOBIO. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Saaki has been deleted five times, each time with reasons given. Please stop trying to create an article about this person (presumed to be you). David notMD (talk) 20:47, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Which article that I wrote was faulty and what was wrong with it?

<redacted> left a message at my page

<redacted> (talk) 21:48, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Yet I see that <redacted>"no longer exists". I would like to learn from my mistakes so please help me out. --Wikkrockiana (talk) 20:16, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

The message they left was about the speedy deletion of the article Robot Pro-Wrestling Dekinnoka (which no longer exists). It was deleted per A7. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 20:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Wikkrockiana: (edit conflict) Looks like it was Robot Pro-Wrestling Dekinnoka. According to the deletion notice, it was deleted because there was no credible claim of significance. <redacted>> is still around, they just changed their username to Deepfriedokra. --bonadea contributions talk 20:23, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

That was four years ago. There is information in the deletion notice that might prove useful. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:56, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Maybe sockpuppetry?

Apologies if this isn't the right place for it, but I was hoping for opinions on whether some weird editing on a few pages is worthy of opening a sockpuppet investigation. The articles Springfield Model 1861, Model 1795 Musket, Springfield Model 1892–99, and maybe others have a very similar spate of edits from the same clump of users, several of which have account names that might link them to blocked account SpringfieldSavy1795. I've never done anything on SPI before and it seems like they might require more evidence than just the suspicious patterns here. Any thoughts or suggestions welcome. -- Fyrael (talk) 16:50, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Fyrael. This is being discussed at the talk page of the blocking administrator. Feel free to comment at User talk:Widr. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Fyrael, hello, my senior colleague Cullen328 has done justice to your question. Please next time you might want to use WP:SPI For reporting possible sockpuppetry and no a suspicion of sockpuppetry isn’t enough to open an SPI but having said, you also do not need an inordinate amount of evidence to initiate an SPI. In-fact if a pattern can be established between two users who have similar style of editing a WP:DUCK test is evoked. Celestina007 (talk) 21:43, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much to you both! -- Fyrael (talk) 21:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi

helloSpaceman6651 (talk) 21:51, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Spaceman6651: Hi there, and welcome to the Teahouse! Did you have a question about editing Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 21:56, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

No I was just trying to be politeSpaceman6651 (talk) 21:59, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome! Thanks for spreading WIkiLove. This is a place for questions, but you might enjoy the Kindness Campaign. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 22:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pyrrho the Skeptic I think Wikilove messages are OK when a user has actually interacted with another user, and wants to acknowledge something. Random message left by brand new users seem unnecessary and a little suspicious, and I would not want to encourage that too much. I have politely mentioned this on Spaceman's talk page. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough. I try to assume the best and deal with actual bad or annoying behavior when appropriate. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 22:31, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

artist notability

Hello, I am trying to prove the subject's notability but I'm having a hard time. The topic already exists in a different language so it isn't like this topic isn't notable but even with references it doesn't seem enough to be approved. I'm not sure why a stub won't suffice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sebastian_Masuda Pancakesmelon (talk) 19:02, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Other language Wikipedias have different notability criteria from ours. The existence of an article in another language is no indication that the subject is notable under the definition here at enwiki. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:06, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I know that. Thanks for the advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pancakesmelon (talk • contribs) 19:26, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Pancakesmelon, I've added a comment to the draft. -- Hoary (talk) 22:43, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

What is "constructive"?

Just curious to know why supply of a requested citation and ensuing refinement of a sentence to better reflect a critical appreciation of the accuracy of its sources might not be considered as "constructive". This related to recent minor edits to the article "Professor". Any ideas? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Protestant Revival (talk • contribs) 21:42, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Protestant Revival: Welcome to the Teahouse! Thank you for your efforts to improve the Professor article. Even after reading your edit summaries, I don't understand why you added information about real people to the "In fiction" section of the Professor article. Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, you can discuss your edits at the article's talk page - Talk:Professor - to come to a consensus with other editors on how to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks GoingBatty. The issue related to examples of a "non-academic" use of the title "professor". There are other real people listed at the end of this section who used the title "professor" for non-academic roles. Accordingly, the additional example I provided appears to follow logically in this sequence. However, should this be a new section for all of these together, instead of the "professor" for a Punch and Judy puppet show also appearing under fiction? Clearly the narrative of a Punch and Judy puppet show is fictional but the performer is not. Any suggestions for better overall consistency in this regard? Protestant Revival (talk) 22:02, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Protestant Revival: Interesting that the "In fiction" section ends with saloon pianists and puppeteers, who are not fictional. Again, I suggest discussing on Talk:Professor. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:16, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Protestant Revival A 'constructive' edit is one that improves the encyclopaedic nature of any article, and does not detract or render it of lesser value than before the edit was made. You made four consecutive edits (see here), which were reverted en block because one or more of them added pointless information about one specific theological college. That was not acceptable or relevant to the article, but it is unfortunate perhaps that, as a result, your other edit about Punch and Judy was included in that removal. The cited Guardian source appears to support your claim about 'professorships' for Punch and Judy entertainers, and was probably constructive,. But the other definitely wasn't, and sounded as if you had some axe to grind. Perhaps a little more critiquing of the global relevancy of each edit could be useful. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Nick Moyes. In that case, I can restore the cited Guardian source but I am just wondering if anyone can provide another example of an explicitly "non-academic" role that carries the title of "professor"? I merely added an extra example of which I had recently become aware alongside those of real life performers in the arts. Is there any other precedent for a "non-academic" professor in a third level institution? If not, then the example I cited appears to be a curious novelty and I would have thought mention of this with appropriate supporting references might be accordingly constructive. If there is a better way to do this, please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Protestant Revival (talk • contribs)

@Protestant Revival: Your questions about improving the article are best addressed at the relevant talk page, not here. But I'm afraid one esoteric example of a title's usage in one minor, inconsequential college in one part of the world is so irrelevant to a global encyclopaedia, that it is not helpful to include it. Curious novelties are just that, and, unless significant, should be left out of Wikipedia articles. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:15, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Nick, much appreciated. The person who reverted my edits hasn't got back to me yet but had sent me a message suggesting I discuss the matter here. Protestant Revival (talk) 23:38, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Infobox Editing

Hello!
I'm doing some research in how to mark a repairability score to electronic devices that are listed. Originally I wanted to make a project to add it in the articles, but another user suggested that we work on adding it to the infobox. My first question is how do I go about doing that? The second was that they (the user who made the suggestion) said it needed to be discussed by the community before making any changes like that. Where, specifically, would I start that conversation? Is there somewhere I could read up about that process?
Thank you!
SilmarilElwing 00:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@SilmarilElwing: Welcome to the Teahouse! Each infobox template has a talk page for discussion. For example, if you were thinking about adding the {{Infobox computer hardware}}, you could discuss your idea on Template talk:Infobox computer hardware. Be sure to provide a reliable source for the "repairability". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thanks for the quick reply! I'm still a little confused. I went and clicked around a few places and I'm not making the connection. So, for example, [Pro (4th gen)] has a talk page (obviously), but I can't find the corresponding talk page for its infobox. SilmarilElwing 22:46, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@SilmarilElwing: Looking at the code of the iPad Pro (4th generation) article, I see it uses {{Infobox information appliance}}. The corresponding talk page is Template talk:Infobox information appliance. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:08, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Nancy Kassebaum

I want to make major changes and additions to the Nancy Kassebaum page to correct factual errors in the current version and greatly expand sections on her life, elections, and record in office.

However, I served as a senior aide on her staff for years and have an obvious conflict of interest. As a former journalist I am well versed in the need for neutral, verifiable content but have no problem having any and all my changes vetted by others.

Since I have never contributed to Wikipedia before I would like advice on how to proceed. Sagamore83 (talk) 00:04, 1 September 2021 (UTC) Sagamore83 (talk) 00:04, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome! The best way to proceed is to bring these questions up on the article's Talk Page. Please make sure to disclose your conflict of interest there, just as you did here. Let us know if you have further questions. Happy editing! Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 00:09, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sagamore83: Welcome to the Teahouse and thanks for disclosing your relationship here; please also do so on Talk:Nancy Kassebaum. Your proposed additions and corrections should use Wikipedia's edit requests system. You can submit one on the article's talk page; each change should be done in an "X to Y" format and supplied with a reliable source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:14, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sagamore83: Welcome! I recommend you start small, as some editors get scared off when being asked to make major changes all at once. Suggest a change for one factual error (with a reliable source) and let that get fixed. Then keep working through the issues one by one until they're all fixed. It may take a while, since we're all volunteers and there is no deadline. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:17, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Can you write an article for me?

Can you write an article for me? Thelandof100rulers (talk) 00:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Thelandof100rulers: No. Wikipedia editors are volunteers who write about what we're interested in. If you want an article written, tell us why it's important for an encyclopedia and someone may decide to write it, or you could try to write it yourself (although it's not easy). {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:33, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Thelandof100rulers: You can try posting a request at WP:Requested articles (with a few reliable sources), but there's no guarantee that anyone will ever write the article. GoingBatty (talk) 02:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

unsure how to proceed with a page I created

Hi, I'm an academic and I noticed that several of my colleagues have Wikipedia entries, so I thought I needed to create one for myself (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Peter_J._Rentfrow). It wasn't until after I submitted a draft of the entry that I learned that individuals are strongly discouraged from submitting a page about themselves. A contributor pointed this out to me and I regret not knowing beforehand. However, McMatter indicated that I may meet the criteria of NACADEMIC. Given that I should not be creating my own page, I don't know if I should just delete the material I provided or if I should provide the information needed to determine if I meet the criteria.

I very much appreciate this community and don't want to violate any more rules. Hence my request for guidance on how I should proceed.

many thanks, Jason Pjrentfrow (talk) 21:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Welcome and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! We're glad you're here. McMatter's comments sum up some of the issues with the draft. If possible, try to address those by relying less heavily on synthesis of primary sources, and looking instead for secondary sources covering or presenting an analysis of your work. And it looks like a source for your fellowship was requested. I would work on gathering as many additional secondary sources as you can. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 22:27, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pjrentfrow I would agree with Pyrrho. We do have rather an imbalance of articles about academics, especially female ones, which is why WP:NACADEMIC was written (because most academics tend not to hit the headlines in the way many other people do, yet can be highly notable in their own way). I'm guessing you may have looked at the Criteria for 'notability' there and felt you might not meet them at this time? There is certainly no shame in being honest and owning up to creating an article about yourself ....many do it intentionally, and on very weak grounds, and there's no need to request deletion. Any draft not edited after a period of 6 months is automatically deleted anyway, but you might wish to assess whether you are likely to meet our criteria or not, and whether to proceed. We do accept biogs on University websites, even when written by the staff themselves, because there is a presumption that the University has had some editorial oversight on what is there (unlike many a glowing hyperbole-rich biography on LinkedIn, which could easily be totally fabricated).

Looking at your entry at Cambs Uni, it was unclear if you hold a prestigious professor-role, so that might not meet our NACADEMIC criteria, yet your Fellowships to prestigious societies (provided election is on merit and not payment) would support notability, as might your editorial role within academic journals. Citing sources which directly support your notability here would be helpful, as would removing from the references all or most of those papers you've published, instead placing them in a 'Selected publications' section. Avoid saying anything about yourself which cannot be substantiated by reference to proper citations (even if you know it as fact!). You do recognise that you have a Conflict of Interest in drafting this - something we do permit, but generally strongly discourage, and if you do want to continue with editing it, it would help if you followed the guidance on that page in declaring on your userpage who you are, and your connection with that draft. I hope this is helpful. Obviously, you may simply stop work on it and in time it will be removed. But there is merit, so feel free to proceed cautiously and either return here for advice or resubmit at Articles for Creation once you've addressed the points raised. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:50, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Pjrentfrow, thank you for your candor and openness to suggestions. Well, as a ferinstance: Geographical psychology is an emerging field concerned with the spatial organization of psychological phenomena and the mechanisms that are responsible for their organization. Rentfrow's research in geographical psychology demonstrates that social influence, ecological influence, and selective migration are key mechanisms that contribute to the spatial clustering of psychological characteristics. Geographical psychology is best explained in an article, Geographical psychology; but this doesn't (yet) exist, so OK. (Incidentally, please don't [yet] create a draft for such an article.) The assertion that Rentfrow's research in PQR demonstrates XYZ is something that needs to be backed up by a third party; as it is, you've sourced it to a paper by Rentfrow et al; so really, this says little more than "Rentfrow claims that his research in geographical psychology demonstrates XYZ", which clearly is unsatisfactory. The next section says that Personal tastes and preferences – whether for music, film, television, or clothing – serve to satisfy individuals’ social and psychological needs. A central aim of Rentfrow's work in this area seeks "is"? to understand the degree to which personal preferences reflect and effectively communicate information about people’s psychological characteristics. Well, all right . . . but what steps has he made toward achieving this? Also, four references are given, yet each is by Rentfrow, et al. What we need are one or two references by psychologists independent of him. -- Hoary (talk) 23:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Pjrentfrow you may want to read An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

help

Can you help me find some sites that are meant for history searches? Spaceman6651 (talk) 22:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:14, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Spaceman6651: If you're looking for sites that could be used as reliable sources, many Wikipedia articles have helpful links on the article's talk page (e.g. the Find sources line at the top of Talk:History). Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Spaceman6651, I suggest that you read some Featured articles and Good articles in the broad topic area of history. Those articles have successfully undergone peer review. Look at the type of references used in those articles and seek out similar ones. In general, for history topics, books written by notable, respected historians and published by university presses are the best. Articles by recognized academics published in peer reviewed academic history journals are also very good sources. Other sources may be acceptable depending on their reputations for reliabilty but I am describing the gold standard. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Spaceman6651 Per Cullen328's suggestion, see Category:FA-Class history articles and Category:GA-Class history articles. Happy reading! GoingBatty (talk) 03:14, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Colors Telugu and Viacom18 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom18

Icecreamland (talk) 03:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Icecreamland: Welcome to the Teahouse! I'm sorry you're having a hard time with your edits to the Colors Telugu and Viacom18. In order for Colors Telugu to be changed from a redirect to its own article, you'll have to find multiple reliable sources showing that it meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. You may wish to create Draft:Colors Telugu to work on the article, and submit it through the Articles for creation process. See Help:Your first article for lots of good information. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:56, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Help with correcting Wikipedia entry

Hello, this entry breaks a lot of the guidelines that would normally get an entry flagged, banned or removed.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tether_(cryptocurrency)

For some reason, it had not been addressed despite areas where citations are not provided, information is unverifiable, content is biased and violates Wikipedia guidelines.

I request editors give this a proper review. Meebz (talk) 04:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Meebz: Welcome to the Teahouse! Thank you for your efforts to improve the Tether (cryptocurrency) article. I see you have already started a conversation on the article's talk page. I suggest you post specific details of the issues you see that you cannot resolve yourself, so that you can collaborate with other editors to develop a consensus. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:18, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Meebz: I see your edits to remove large amounts of information that contains references have been reverted. Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, your next step should be to discuss your specific concerns on the article's talk page. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 04:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

How can i improve my draft tone

How should I improve my draft, Deborah mannas and will Roberts Nihara.widefy (talk) 03:41, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Nihara.widefy (talk) 03:43, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy links Draft:Deborah Mannas and Draft:Will Roberts (actor). GoingBatty (talk) 04:00, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Nihara.widefy: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography has the guidelines for how articles about people should be structured, including the importance of what information should be included in the first sentence and the first paragraph of an article. Proper capitalization, spelling, and punctuation is very important. Song titles should be in quotation marks, while albums/magazines/movies/TV series should be italicized. You should refer to people by their last name (e.g. "Mannas", not "Deborah") per WP:SURNAME. There should not be any external links in the drafts, except for references or a dedicated "External links" section. Section headers should not contain any references. Sentences such as "will roberts is a renaissane man to say the least" seem very promotional, and not encyclopedic. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 04:13, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: thank you for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nihara.widefy (talk • contribs) 06:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Reaching out

...reaching out to someone who patiently will guide me through my first process of creating and posting a wki page; fast learner here. thank you! R Chefraphael (talk) 22:41, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Chefraphael, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. The guidance I will give (which might not be what you want to hear) is that your question is a bit like "Hello, I've just started learning the building trade. Who will patiently guide me through my first process of building a house from scratch?" My answer is "Spend a while - at least a few months - learning the trade before you even try it". I can almost guarantee that you will have a frustrating and disappointing time if you try to create an article (not "post a page") before you are ready. But Your first article is there to give you some pointers when you decide to try. --ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Chefraphael Further to Colin's sound advice (akin to "Who will teach me quickly to be a great chef?"), Wikipedia only accepts articles about topics that meet its Notability criteria. Please read that as well as WP:NBIO. We would need independent, reliably published sources that talk in detail and in depth about a subject for those notability criteria to be met. If you don't meet them, then there is no chance for an article here. We do not accept IMdB as such a source, as it is user-generated, with no editorial oversight. We also discourage people from creating articles about themselves, as they have a Conflict of interest which makes them the worst person to write about themselves encyclopaedia. See WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for further advice, then read Your First Article and Referencing for Beginners. Hope this helps a bit. Happy reading! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

One more for the reading list: An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. -- Hoary (talk) 23:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Super happy with the many reflections - all makes sense... shout out to @DavidnotMD: you have a fascinating profile... seemingly we share a rare love for nutritional (correct) science in common... I'm probably overstepping multiple wiki regulations for even responding in this matter... I'll take it as a bonus learning experience! yet, I'm okay trying to get a wiki page up; stumbling along. so, ill remove the hyper links and the IMDb link... but can I "mention" it? and, what is the correct "reference" if not linking it to another site? cheers group (am I allowed to respond to someones post? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chefraphael (talk • contribs) 01:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Chefraphael: Check out Help:Referencing for beginners to see how references are formatted on Wikipedia. Note that the reliable sources Wikipedia is looking for are secondary and independent of the subject. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 07:17, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Best Way to Revive a Deleted Article?

An article for a movie was deleted a month ago due to lacking notability. A month later, the movie has now received coverage from Teen Vogue, Tatler, and Digital Spy, so I'm pretty sure it now meets the minimum level of notability requirements. I was wondering what is the best way to "undelete" the article. Should I simply undo the last edit on the article (the deletion) or should I start a completely new draft of the article and submit it that way?

Thanks for the help. Koikefan (talk) 06:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Koikefan, if you make a request on the talk page of the admin who did the deletion, they'll probably restore it for you as a draft. However, as you're confident there are now good sources for you to cite, you should find some such sources, and write a new draft based on what they say. That will be easier than trying to get the deleted version into an acceptable state (I speak from experience – see sunk cost). Maproom (talk) 07:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, it depends on the state of the draft. Koikefan, if you have trouble finding the name of the admin, let us know the name of the film and we'll help. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

LOOKING FOR A WIKIPEDIA MENTOR WITH BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE ABOUT JAPAN

FYI

– converted first sentence to Header --Maresa63 ^Talk 05:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

For one on my university English classes, I had students translate some Japanese Wikipedia articles into English. I have 5-6 translated articles and would like a veteran Wikipedia editor to help me upload, format, and edit the English articles. I know HTML and basic coding, but am not yet used to the Wikipedia format. One sample article I worked on is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TNewfields/sandbox

Thanks in advance for any guidance. TNewfields (talk) 05:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@TNewfields: I took a look at the content in your sandbox. Wikipedia is not a travel guide, and yours currently reads like one. All articles must also be sourced to reliable sources (see Help:Referencing for beginners, which yours lacks. I also don't think Hakone's hot springs deserve a separate article from Hakone (per WP:FORK). If you have any question about editing Wikipedia, you may always ask here. However, most editors will not write articles for you. Instead, you might want to check out the resources at Wikipedia:Education program. I also suggest you to complete The Wikipedia Adventure, which will give you a crash course on how to edit Wikipedia to be more familiar with how things work here and teach your class better. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:48, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

TNewfields, you don't have the (considerable) skills necessary to create articles on en:Wikipedia, but you're expecting your students to create such articles? Or, you're asking your pupils to supply the raw text for such articles, and expecting volunteers here, with both the necessary Wikipedia skills and a knowledge of Japanese, to do the difficult stuff? Either way, I doubt it's going to work. Maproom (talk) 06:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Er, Maproom, TNewfields says that these are translations. The example is, as it says, from ja:箱根温泉. So for the students, it appears to be a translation task. TNewfields is asking people here "to help me upload, format, and edit the English articles". Background knowledge of Japan isn't really necessary; but it is desirable, because when ameliorating some infelicitous prose, background knowledge will help to get the meaning right. So what do you have to do, TNewfields? First, strip the contents list and section numbering (Wikipedia will automate such numbering). Add the references. As is unfortunately normal in ja:Wikipedia, there's little referencing in the source article: you (singular/plural) will have to provide more. Italicize where appropriate by putting a pair of (non-directional) single quotation marks ('') in front of, and a second pair after, what you want italicized. Provide internal links by putting "[[" in front of, and "]]" after, what you want linked. 難しくないですよ。大学教員でもできます。 Then move the result to the draft area. Oh, and your very first edit of a translation should have an edit summary acknowledging that it's a translation and specifying the source; see this. -- Hoary (talk) 07:48, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Without references, none of these will be accepted, regardless of how good you or your students get at formatting. English refs preferred, but Japanese accepted. All factual statements must be supported by references - verification is essential. David notMD (talk) 08:08, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I exaggerated somewhat. The original has 20 references, to 14 sources. But these shouldn't just be added; they should be checked, their content confirmed, and then added. Help:Referencing for beginners will explain. -- Hoary (talk) 08:16, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Edit not appearing

I edited an article to add content along with a different point of view. The edit has two sources, but a month later it does not appear. Why is the edit being blocked? RonWillow (talk) 09:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Assuming you mean your edits to Betsy Ross flag. Those were reverted (click on View history, top menu), and the reverting editor pointed at an ongoing discussion on the talk page of the article as a place to make a case. Before you start there, also review extended discussions on same topic at the Archive of older Talk content. David notMD (talk) 09:30, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Searching the Teahouse questions archive

Hi. Is it possible to search the Teahouse questions archive for questions I've had answered in the past ie search by my user name? Thanks. Buckland1072 (talk) 13:09, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Buckland1072: I believe this search should cover all of them. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:17, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

edit being reverted due to no reason

hi, i have been making a few edits on the pages of some elite universities highlighting the massive admission scandals that took place, which allowed students to bribe their way in. i had done everything right, but some clearly biased people are removing my edits saying that the source wasn't reliable (it clearly was). what can i do about this? Virtue1234 (talk) 09:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Virtue1234 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. (as an example) The edit was removed partially because you placed it in the lead of the article about Yale, over-emphasizing what historically speaking is a minor event in the history of the university, placing undue emphasis on it. The source was also only provided as a weblink and not a properly formatted citation(see WP:REFB for information on writing citations). Please discuss your concens on the article talk page, to arrive at a consensus. The article won't be whitewashed, but it also won't be made biased the other way against the university. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Virtue1234 Once your posts are replied to, they shouldn't be removed. 331dot (talk) 09:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

sorry my bad, i am new to this stuff. won't happen again Virtue1234 (talk)

Virtue1234, the Teahouse is here for that expressed reason, to help and assist both new and experienced editors with any issues or questions concerning Wikipedia and editing. You learn by being bold and adapting when you make a mistake. It's a win-win for the encyclopedia. Happy editing!

--ARose Wolf 13:43, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Embedding of Youtube and Military details in infobox

Hi, I wanted to know that has there been any discussion in past on inclusion of Youtube or Military details in the infobox of a person when it is/was not their primary work of area. I myself feel that it should not be included and want to remove from some pages but I don't have anything to support my edits. -ink&fables «talk» 08:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@-ink&fables We should include at most one Wikipedia:External links in the Infobox to help identify the organization, so without further context I'd generally agree that adding youtube links is likely wrong. What do you mean by military details? Can you list which articles you have in mind? ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:40, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Shushugah: For example, Lee Seung-gi, I mean every man in South Korea is mandate by law to serve in army. Does we need to add it in infobox? I even had an edit war with an user few weeks ago over its removal from infobox. -ink&fables «talk» 14:51, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

how save edits in source code mode?

how do i save edits? there is only publish, preview and changes. for example, if i am unsure about changes so that i can find and learn from documentation? it will save a lot of data for me. 28au21 (talk) 05:27, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@28au21: Welcome to the Teahouse. You have to press the Publish changes button to save them. It used to be "Save changes" but people didn't know that any changes made were ~~publicised~~ published. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @28au21: I'm assuming you mean that you're working on improving an article and you want to save unfinished work. I suggest you to go to your sandbox at User:28au21/sandbox, copy and paste your work in progress source code, and click "Publish changes". That sandbox is your own personal space, and you may save there as many times as you'd like. Alternatively, you may want to copy and paste that code into an external software like Microsoft Word and save it there. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:40, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: @Ganbaruby: i was not clear. i want to save edits locally and publish later (after few minutes). saving temporarily will save unintended changes or i can look for docs (if i have doubt or thoughts after making a change). -28au21 (talk) 06:45, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@28au21: There is no way to "save locally" on a Wikipedia page. You should use your sandbox if you're still working on something that you do not want to go public yet, because saving there has no effect on actual Wikipedia articles. When you feel like you're done, use the "show preview" function to check if the article looks as intended, and then copy that into the live Wikipedia article. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@28au21: Another option is to save the wikitext to a text file on your computer. I do this often when I need to step away from the computer but have an edit that's only half done. Be sure to give the file a descriptive name and make sure that the article hasn't been edited since your save, otherwise you'll have to make sure to reconcile your version with any changes made. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 15:16, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

SUGGESTIONS TO WRITE ABOUT AN ORGANISATION, WITHOUT BEING BLAMED FOR PROMOTION

How do i write about an organisation without being blamed for promoting the organisation. Please suggest me some points i should keep in mind. Liveit1 (talk) 07:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Liveit1. Start by reading Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and then go on to read and study Your first article. For understanding about how to write without promotionalism, please read about the Neutral point of view. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:15, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Liveit1, please also avoid posting the content at User:Liveit1 (that's your userpage) and instead create it as a draft article. If you have some link with the organisation concerned, please review Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Liveit1: Please dont shout, it makes you sound like your mad at us. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 14:34, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Liveit1, I would suggest not writing about it if you have any association to the organization via self, family, friends, rivals, etc.. If the organization is notable enough, it should have news articles describing the group in detail that are not press releases, routine news announcements (funding rounds, leadership changes), or promotional in nature. I would stay away from the official website except for just key facts like leadership structure. I would also check if the group is notable beyond the local area per WP:MILL. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I cannot figure out why my page is continually rejected for submission

I am the creator of a Wiki page for the Institute of Child nutrition Draft:Institute of Child Nutrition. I have been working on it for over a year and have been rejected various times, despite adhering and complying to Wiki rules and regulations. Any help would be fantastic. Thank you. Wshammon (talk) 15:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

SL93 put this as their reason: "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies." Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 15:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Wshammon Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not a place for organizations to tell the world about themselves and what they do; that's considered promotional here, you don't have to be actively soliciting. A Wikipedia article about an organization should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia defintion of a notable organization. Wikipedia is not interested in what an organization says about itself, or in merely telling what it does, such as through press releases, announcments of routine activities, brief mentions, or other primary sources. The sources you have offered simply tell what your organization does.

To be successful in writing about your organization, you need to set aside everything you know about it, all materials put out by the organization, and all inappropriate sources, and only write based on the content of independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write in depth about your organization. (I fixed your link, the whole URL is not necessary) 331dot (talk) 15:33, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Wshammon: Also note that your draft was declined, not rejected. They mean very different things here on Wikipedia. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 15:33, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

From what I can see, the topic probably warrants an article, and the article is written at least well enough to be a good start to an article. I'll see what others say, but because of conflict of interest, I might suggest you submit this to Requested Articles. If you do, ping me I will gladly take a look and help create it, if warranted. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 15:40, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for responding so quickly. This is very helpful, and thank you for clarifying that being "denied" is not being "rejected." I will gladly submit this to "Requested Articles" as (talk) stated. I would love some help on this! How do I ping you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wshammon (talk • contribs)

On second thought, since the article draft has already been created, I reached out to the reviewing editor to offer my help with this article, and will proceed to help pending that discussion. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 17:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Wshammon Looked at it (and poked it a bit). Needs a section about what the Institute does, published in sources other than those associated with U Miss. The History section confirms it exists, but not what it does. David notMD (talk) 18:40, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

The opening section ("the lead") should summarise the body of the article, saying briefly what the organisation is and does, and when it was founded. The boring stuff about section 21 of the ... School Lunch Act should be moved to the body of the article, if it's worth keeping at all. Maproom (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Queries regarding block account

Why My Hindi Wikipedia page is Blocked? Why my IP Address is blocked? How can I unlock my Hindi Wikipedia page? I'm facing a problem creating a new Wikipedia Account. Please tell Why? &watiMi&hra (talk) 16:14, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@&watiMi&hra: Welcome to the Teahouse! This is a place to ask questions about the English Wikipedia. For a question about the Hindi Wikipedia, please ask there. Please note that your Draft:NewsGram Hindi on the English Wikipedia will not be approved unless it is translated into English. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Each Wikipedia is a seperate project, and has its own rules on blocking and unblocking. You will need to find the Hindi Wikipedia for a page on blocks. The English page is here Wikipedia:IP_block_exemption, check the sidebar to see if there is a corresponding page for Hindi. RudolfRed (talk) 16:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

If your account is blocked on the Hindi Wikipedia, you will need to address that there using whatever process they have to do so. 331dot (talk) 16:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: They were blocked on the Hindi Wikipedia for link spamming, and it looks like they need an enwiki block because all their contributions here have been doing the same thing - spamming random links to the same website dressed up as citations into various articles. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 16:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

tsk, tsk, tsk --ARose Wolf 18:35, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Also as I noted on Ohnoitsjamie's talk page this account is obviously the same person as RaiKashish, who has spent the last year spamming links to newsgram.com into various articles. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 19:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Where can I find more articles regarding film and television to edit?

I want to edit film and television articles where can I find them? २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 19:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी, try these links: Category:Film and Category:Television shows. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी: You could start by reading the articles for your favorite films and TV series and making updates as needed. You can also visit the WikiProject Cleanup Listings for "Films" and "Television stations" (either "alphabetic", "by cat", or "CSV") and find articles with issues that need to be fixed. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:15, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Technical help for an editor

There's a user with a {{help me}} request that's been languishing, likely due to the technical knowledge required to answer it. Please check out User_talk:TerraFrost#Help_me! and help out if you can. I will likely remove this notice when it's been handled. Primefac (talk) 20:35, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

If TerraFrost isn't getting an answer due to the knowledge required, perhaps they could try asking the more technically minded folk at the village pump (technical). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:06, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I request senior experienced to check this article

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Trane# Thomas Trane has no reference nothing. I did some minor edits which I think I need to do but I think this article is not matching Wikipedia guidelines. Requesting any experienced Wikipedian to check it out Thankyou. २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 20:29, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Tagged for CSD A7. 2405:201:4013:80AA:1081:181A:60BA:31C1 (talk) 20:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी I tagged it with Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion A7 (non notable biography), it's an article that existed since 2007 with little improvement since. Worth also mentioning, that per Wikipedia:INHERITED, just because the photographer worked with a famous music band, it does not confer notability to them.

Thank you for reporting it! When you're a new editor, it's better to focused on content improvements and seeking help when deleting stuff which is exactly what you did. Well done from my end! Happy editing! ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:40, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welcome_to_the_Show_(album)#Personnel Welcome to the Show (album) doesn't have any reference. Does Wikipedia accepts it? २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 20:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी: I copied a reference from Evil Masquerade to Welcome to the Show (album) and added an External link to AllMusic. GoingBatty (talk) 21:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrik_Brockmann# Henrik Brockmann has only one reference I'm marking Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion say me If I'm wrong.२ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 21:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@२ तकर पेप्सी You should not be marking pages for deletion at this point. A lack of references is in itself not a criteria for deletion. An article is Wikipedia:Notable or not based on what existing references there are out there, and if you didn't do the search, then you are potentially deleting an article about a noteworthy topic (albeit poorly sourced on Wikipedia). Also, do not link to the entire url but use Wikipedia:Wikilinks. Please self revert your deletion nomination ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry and thakyou. I will keep in mind to your words. २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 21:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Removal of maintenance template from published article

The article concerned is a biographical article: Josef Josten. The maintenance template recommends improvement with additional citations. I have added several citations and now believe that all the material facts in the article are covered by the sources quoted. Note that where multiple items are covered by one source, I have normally inserted the citation just once within or at the end of the paragraph, so as not to clutter up the text. Is it now reasonable for me to removbe the maintenance template? Thank you in advance for your advice. Honza Giles (talk) 15:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

You could ask on the articles Talk Page first, to ensure other interested editors have a chance to review the sources, but it looks like you've (probably) added enough citations to warrant removal of the tag. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 16:16, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Honza Giles - often, the best person to ask about removal of a template, is the editor who added it - in this case User:Marchjuly. He can then agree, or explain what he thinks is still outstanding - this avoids edit-warring over a template - Best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 16:46, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Honza Giles: Thank you for trying to improve the article. There are certainly more citations being cited now in the article then there were when I added the {{More citations needed}} template, which is generally a good thing. Many of the citations cited, however, are still ones that aren't available online which can make assessing them quite hard. Citations, for sure, don't need to be available online as long as they're to reliable sources, published and accessible, and used in proper context. Assuming in good faith that you read the sources being cited in the article and assessed them, then it's probably fine to remove the template from the top of the page as explained here. If it's re-added by another editor, though, then you probably should discuss things on the article talk page and try and address that person's concerns. Please note that you may be asked to further clarify a source to help in its verification.

There is, however, another issue with the article that needs addressing and that has to do with the file you uploaded for use in the main infobox. You're claiming that this is your "own work" and also that it's Josten's passport photo. Did you actually take this photo yourself? If you didn't, then it's most likely not your "own work" as I tried to explain to you before at c:User talk:Honza Giles with respect to some other images that you uploaded previously to Commens. Why do you think this photo has been released under a "cc-by-sa-4.0"? Did you find the photo somewhere where it clearly and explicitly states it has been released under such a license? This same photo can be seen used here, but there's nothing which clarifies it's provenance; so, there's nothing to support your claim of licensing or "own work". Photos have to come from somewhere and they may still be protected by copyright even if they're "freely available" and can be downloaded from somewhere online. Unless you able to formally verify that this photo is actually you're own work or that it has been released as you licensed it as explained here or here, Commons won't be able to keep the file. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:06, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Delete My account

I want to delete my wikipedia account so please to delete it because of too many problems. Randubaba (talk) 12:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Randubaba. If you’re having problems editing, then maybe a Teahouse can help you sort them out if you can explain what the issues are. Wikipedia accounts, however, cannot be deleted for the reasons given here. The best that you can do is simply stop using the account if you no longer want to edit. — Marchjuly (talk) 12:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Randubaba: There is a way. See Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:37, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Randubaba, hello and welcome to the Teahouse as stated by my colleague @Marchjuly, is there a particular incident you may want to reference? That is what particular “trouble” are you encountering? If you take little time to explain things to us we would assist you in editing better or see it that you do not encounter any more “troubles” moving forward. Celestina007 (talk) 23:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Randubaba: Just to clarify that "Courtesy vanishing" is not really the deletion of an account per se in that all information associated will be "deleted" forever; the account information and edit history is just hidden from public view and can only be seen by administrators or others capable of seeing such things. It's referred to as a "courtesy" because its use is discretionary (i.e. there needs to be a pretty good reason for it) and because it can be taken back (i.e. undone) at a later date if necessary. Please make sure that you fully understand this as well as WP:Courtesy vanishing#What vanishing is not before making such a request because you're going to be asked specifically why you need such action to be taken. Anachronist is an administrator and if you're having problems that you feel uncomfortable discussing here at the Teahouse, then maybe try contacting Anachronist or another administrator via WP:EMAIL where you can discuss them in private. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:43, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

While I can give advice, I cannot "vanish" an account. I believe one needs to be a bureaucrat to do that. Otherwise Marchjuly's explanation above is spot-on. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:29, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

What language should I be using?

Initially, I had edited and corrected Wikipedia articles using British English. Should I be using British or American English? GentianGashi (talk) 16:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

In general, either one is fine, as long as it's consistent throughout the article. Articles with strong national ties are a different story. Happy editing! Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 16:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Fixed Pyrrho the Skeptic's link to Wikipedia's Manual of Style. GoingBatty (talk) 16:15, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

To expand on the above, if an article uses British, do not switch to American, and vice versa. Even if you are careful to consistently change it throughout the article, that is still frowned upon. The same is true for other things. For example, Wikipedia is neutral as to use of the Oxford comma. If an article consistenty uses it (or consistently doesn't use it), don't change it. --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 18:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@GentianGashi: The policy here is WP:ENGVAR. Articles with ties to a specific variety of English should be written in that Variety, e.g. Articles on British politicians should be written in British English, articles on Indian villages should be written in Indian English, and articles on American laws should be written in American English. For articles that do not have ties to any specific country the editor that starts the article gets to choose which version of English to use, which all subsequent editors should follow. (The same general principle applies to other formatting choices, like what style of citations to use). 192.76.8.74 (talk) 19:16, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, sometimes an article evolves in how things are spelled. For example, the Cider article started out as American English, and then had a mixture of American and British spelling for years, and then all the American spelling was removed. Talk:Cider/Archive 1#WP:ENGVAR tells the story. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:50, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Anachronist, we read there of the introduction of a misspelled American spelling of "pasteurized" as "pasturized". "Pasteurized" is so very distinctively American that ... it's used in the Oxford English Dictionary. One can stick {{Use British English Oxford spelling|date=September 2021}} atop articles such as this and thereby avoid complaints from any but the most fanatical spelling fetishists. That there's an entire article devoted to Oxford spelling is (for me) somewhat yawn-inducing, but its content is quite sensible. -- Hoary (talk) 23:47, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: Heh. I wasn't aware of "Oxford spelling". Thanks for that. Reading that article gave me a sense of a suggestion of the historical rivalry between England and France: "good heavens, we're British, we shouldn't be using French spelling (of all things) to spell English words!" I've also heard it said "we French don't hate the British — just their cooking." ~Anachronist (talk) 00:41, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Anachronist, if avoidance of "pasteurised" is associated with francophobia, I'm inclined to use "pasteurised". But all this is too silly. Now I remember an article where I Briticized (?) the existing style. I fessed up and all was well, because (like most people) Lesser Cartographies has their head screwed on right. -- Hoary (talk) 00:59, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

More shields needed in List of road routes in Victoria

Hello there, we need more shields in List of road routes in Victoria's list, can you add it? Mlik point (talk) 11:11, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

You appear to be successfully editing the article. Carry on. David notMD (talk) 11:26, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

There are shields needed for:

A30
A77
A96
B40
B44
B92
B401
B840
B861
B870
B989
C259
C308
C655
C989
C996

Can you upload it for me? Mlik point (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mlik point, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are asking a selection of volunteers, most of whom have no interest in Victorian highways, if they will do a job that you can do yourself. If you look at File:AUS Alphanumeric Route A39.svg, you can see where that one came from, and the justification which ws used for uploading it to Wikipedia. You can use the upload wizard to upload the others. Alternativbely, you might find somebody at WikiProject Australia who is interested in working with you to do it. --ColinFine (talk) 13:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

We have added red links for upload files for Talk:List of road routes in Victoria, can you do it? Mlik point (talk) 01:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point: You might also want to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian Roads. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:13, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Disputed Leaders

How do I show that two people claim to be a leader of a region in an infobox? In the Tigray Region, both Debretsion Gebremichael and Abraham Belay claim to be the true leader of the Tigray region with Debretsion Gebremichael having de facto control and Abraham Belay having de jure control. Wowzers122 (talk) 02:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Wowzers122: That almost sounds like the United States in which the former president refused to concede.

You could list both in the infobox, like this:

president=Abraham Belay (de jure)<br>Debretsion Gebremichael (de facto)

...which would appear as two separate lines in the infobox. On the other hand, if there is no question about who won the election, it may be simpler just to list the actual winner. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:11, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Anachronist: The election wasn't recognized by the central government. Wowzers122 (talk) 02:16, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Wowzers122: Well, then it might be best to list them both as suggested above. If the international community consensus recognizes one of them, though, that may be an argument to list only one. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:20, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Can you add shields?

Hi there, we need more more more shields in List of road routes in Victoria. To add it, click on red link, go to upload file and click Upload File. Can you do it for us? Mlik point (talk) 00:49, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point: You already asked this in the #More shields needed in List of road routes in Victoria section above. In the future, please don't start a new section for the same topic. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:12, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, Teahouse hosts are generalists, answering questions, not a reserve force of article editors. It appears you did one today. Don't stop. David notMD (talk) 02:48, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Subpage

Hi. I want to remove the subpage heading. There is a heading like User:Example/subpage in a subpage below 'From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia'. In my User:Tajwar.thesuperman/sandbox, there is a heading, < User:Tajwar.thesuperman, I want to remove this. How can I do this? Waiting for reply! Thanks. ➤ Tajwar – thesupermaN!^{【Click to Discuss】} 05:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

You can't. This appears to be a sandbox for your user page; if you move it there, or copy and paste it there, then the text you hope to remove won't appear there. And so (if I understand you right), you have nothing to worry about. -- Hoary (talk) 06:26, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Protect a page as quick as possible

Sidharth Shukla please quicky protect the page as he died recently and page getting multiple edits from inexperienced users. २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 06:48, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

२ तकर पेप्सी Page protection requests may be posted to WP:RFPP; active vandalism may be reported to WP:AIV. 331dot (talk) 07:00, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Is WP:ANI the correct venue?

Not new here, I have posted on WP:ANI regarding a concern I have on another editor pertaining to overciting on multiple occasion despite informing user not to do so. However, no one actually follow up over there yet, did I posted it in the wrong venue, as I see other newer threads got some sort of follow up. If I did posted it in wrong venue, where should I move the discussion thread to? — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 06:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: I think it was the right place to report it. One thing that can make it easier for admins and other editors to react more quickly to an ANI report is to mention the kind of admin action you are looking for – a temporary or partial block, a strict warning, or something else. Mentioning the extent of the problem, with 40 sources for the same fact added in the most recent overciting edit, would also grab people's attention more. I mean, your report has all the necessary info and it is a good thing to keep such reports brief, but "continuously overciting" is a little vague, and adding a couple of words explaining each diff makes it easier to understand what it is all about. It's not immediately obvious that Special:Diff/1027361379 added three sources to a simple fact which already had three sources, for instance. --bonadea contributions talk 08:46, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea Hi, saw your reply there. Thanks you for the tips, I will try to improve my future report in ANI if situation arises that require admin attention. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 08:49, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Why my artical is draft?

Next discussion : #How to give draft artical to promotion "REVIEW"

Syed89 (talk) 08:04, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Syed89, if you are asking about Draft:Mushkil kusha, it's a draft because (i) it consists of a single, short sentence, and (ii) you haven't submitted it for promotion to article status. (Are you asking about something else?) -- Hoary (talk) 08:59, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Old editor moved my comment without permission.

In Talk:Caretaker Government of Myanmar (2021), Mr/Ms Tartan357 moved my comment without my permission. I added a comment again, but it was reverted. Is this the culture of this community? Unrestricted-Warrior (talk) 08:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Unrestricted-Warrior, why is this a problem? The whole discussion has been moved to another page (see the move template at the top of the thread). ― Tartan357 ^Talk 09:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

When there is an active Merge proposal, the discussion takes place at only one of the articles. In this case Talk:Management Committee of the State Administration Council. Make your position there. David notMD (talk) 09:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Then, I hope to move all the discussion, including you and the other two. - Unrestricted-Warrior (talk) 09:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

First, I found out that "old editor" is a bad word. I repeal this word. In addition, I have a question. Please let me know why the discussions of other editors are left in Talk:Caretaker Government of Myanmar (2021). - Unrestricted-Warrior (talk) 07:57, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Unrestricted-Warrior it appears the others had made their comments before the discussion was moved (and a note was left directing interested editors to comment in the other location). Those comments are already copied to the other location as well. Yes the originals could have been removed, but they weren't which at worst may be confusing, but nothing more. Why would you persist in adding your comment there despite the note? The editor has moved your comment to the other location and you can continue the conversation there. I do not see any problem here. Are you complaining or are you confused and seeking clarification? What exactly do you wish to figure out?

@Tartan357, for the future, you cited MERGEPROP in your edit summary but your move was contrary to the advice given there. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I felt unfair, but it seems to be my misunderstanding. My question has been resolved. Thank you everyone. - Unrestricted-Warrior (talk) 09:22, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Eleni Qirici

Hello! How are you? Can you review my article Eleni Qirici please and can you appear the Wikipedia information on Google please 🙏❤️ Lovingheartloving (talk) 09:11, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

It looks like advertising to me. Probably it will be deleted very soon. -- Hoary (talk) 09:37, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

How to give draft artical to promotion "REVIEW"

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § How to give draft artical to promotion "REVIEW"

– ― Qwerfjkl talk 09:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Previous discussion : #Why my artical is draft?

How to give artical to promotion "REVIEW There is no option for promotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syed89 (talk • contribs) 09:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

You were able to submit your draft Draft:Mushkil kusha and it was declined. Basically, too short to be an article. Within the article [[Ali ibn Abi Talib there is a section listing titles, so perhaps your information can be added there rather than as a separate article. David notMD (talk) 09:52, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

What is AUshield?

Previous discussion : #Can you upload files?

Tell me about AUshield. Mlik point (talk) 09:55, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

You are already successfully adding AJshield symbols to lists of routes in Australia, so why are you asking? David notMD (talk) 09:59, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Nothing, it's AUshield, not AJshield. Mlik point (talk) 10:06, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point Please do not post on Tea House, unless you have a question related to editing. If you want to discuss the template, the talk page is usually the best place, see Template talk:AUshield. Happy editing! Shushugah (he/him • talk) 10:59, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

If editors wish to talk about these issues [[8]] DragonofBatley (talk) 10:13, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Are music streaming services reliable?

I'm asking because I'm seeing pages such as Virtual Riot citing Apple Music. Sorry if I seem dumb by asking this, I don't use Apple Music and so I don't know if I should be using its content on Wikipedia, but I know sites that host user generated content like SoundCloud are not reliable. Thanks! EDM fan 2 (talk) 23:18, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I will try and answer the question I think you are asking. Can we use Apple Music as a source? The answer is yes but only for a very limited amount of information mostly to do with potential rankings on that service. Anything else would be self published and not helpful. Can it be used to support notability? I would say, not currently. I don't believe we currently accept these services' rankings on par with a national billboard type of rank system. (Anyone is free to correct me on this one). I hope that helps. In the case of Virtual Riot I would say the references to Apple Music and Spotify is being used as covert spam. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 23:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I was mostly asking about usage of Apple Music. If the usage of Apple Music/Spotify as references are considered spam, should they get replaced with a reliable source? EDM fan 2 (talk) 00:31, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@EDM fan 2 Some exceptions to WP:SELFPUBLISH include expert sources, but usually podcast links here are not that. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:07, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@EDM fan 2: Welcome to the Teahouse! You may also be interested in the conversation at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 289#Formally make Spotify a "generally unreliable" source?. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:08, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Rudolf Weigl: """...was a fool born in...

2601:206:8100:8A0:BD27:5D05:FD36:EEF1 (talk) 04:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Already dealt with. I'm thinking that article needs more eyes on it. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 04:52, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Seems that the Google Doodle is bringing lots of extra eyes. GoingBatty (talk) 05:17, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately, a significant number of these pairs of eyes appear to be attached to seriously limited brains. Sane, non-silly attention needed. -- Hoary (talk) 05:25, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Lectonar has very wisely s-protected the article, thereby saving a lot of trouble for sensible editors. (With hindsight, I should have done this hours earlier.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:00, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

How do I enter a new line?

So sometimes I see a little enter symbol noting a new line when I edit. I've deleted them with no ill effect, but now I need one. How do I get one so my new line stays a new line? Thanks! The Council of Seraphim | speak before the Council 21:29, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@The Council of Seraphim Welcome to the Tea House! Hitting "enter/return" keys usually does the trick. For example below is a new line.

In some cases where you want to force a newline you can also use {{pb}} e.g. inside an {{Infobox}}. Happy editing! Shushugah (he/him • talk) 21:47, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Shushugah, you got your new line by hitting the enter key and typing a colon. Starting a new line with a colon is seldom, if ever, appropriate in an article. The Council of Seraphim, one can get a new paragraph with two consecutive taps on the enter key, but a simple new line with <br />. -- Hoary (talk) 23:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to you both! The Council of Seraphim | speak before the Council 23:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

If you’re using Visual Editor, it might be Shift+Enter. (I don't have a keyboard to test with and confirm right now.) Don't remove them if they are helping the source code to be more readable. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 12:11, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

military transport

'Smilitary transport1nBold text''''''' 69.125.179.120 (talk) 12:41, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Do you have a question? Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Talk page suggestions

Hello, I'm here again as a newbie in Wikipedia. But I have a simple question- What happens and what should I do when a suggestion regarding an article I'm editing is not attended? I've been doing some research on jstor and some local news agencies so I can edit and add better resources about my hometown's wikipedia article. However, there is one section on the page that refers to an event, and I feel it needs to be removed, since there are no relevant articles about it and the only reference I found that is directly related to the said event does not mention about my hometown's involvement. Initially, I planned to remove the said part but as courtesy, I posted my concern on the article's talk page, hoping some admins/editors can see it. It's been months and there's still no update, and it appears the last interaction on the talk page was back in 2017. In this scenario, what should I do next? Should I go ahead and just remove the part and leave an edit summary? And should this be a practice in the future in case I encounter the same situation? Thank you, and sorry if it's a little confusing. >>> Wjddml (talk) 10:25, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

With a bit of digging, the event appears to be the Rolex China Sea Race, sailed from Hong Kong to Subic Bay (https://www.sail-world.com/news/213183/?source=rss). So yes, delete from the article about your town. David notMD (talk) 10:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, yes it is! The reference I check was from the Royal Hong Kong Yacht Club website, and I also found nothing. Thank you for the fast response. --Wjddml (talk) 11:10, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Wjddml: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you're referring to Talk:Bauang, your post there was only yesterday, and it may take a few days for other editors to respond.

For the general case, when you're looking for input but don't receive a response on an article talk page after a few days, you can ask the associated WikiProject (e.g. Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines) to comment on the article's talk page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I appreciate your help. I will reach out to our friends from Tambayan Philippines for more information. Thank you! --Wjddml (talk) 13:53, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

which template is best to add on Sally Morgan (artist)

which template can be used for Sally Morgan (artist). there are total 3 persons with same name and different title at Sally Morgan. where can i find info about adding template? 28au21 (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@28au21: Welcome to the Teahouse! Try Template:Other people. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:54, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: using {{Other people}} has given me "Sally Morgan (artist) (disambiguation). however, using {{Other people|Sally Morgan}} has given correct link. thanks. -28au21 (talk) 14:16, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Declined Draft

yes they do connect . submitted article is having clear resources. also its verified and trusted information. and there is no point of article to be referred as declined . mentioned links shows clear information about brand . kindly don't declined submission without any foreground pls check facts and information . Sources user field (talk) 12:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Created a section header Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:51, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sources user field: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you're referring to Draft:The VV Group, I suggest you use inline citations to help people understand which references correspond with which statements. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:52, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Sources user field. The references now in the article fail to establish that the company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). They also fail to verify a large majority of the content in the draft article, and Verifiability is a core content policy. The references are directory listing that do not devote significant coverage to the company. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 14:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Can you upload files?

Next discussion : #What is AUshield?

Did you know how to upload files? Mlik point (talk) 08:37, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Mlik point, are you asking how to upload files to either Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons? If so, which, and what kind of file? -- Hoary (talk) 08:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia. Needs more {{AUshield}} shields on List of road routes in Victoria and List of road routes in Victoria (numeric). Mlik point (talk) 09:08, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Mlik point, here's a shield:

. It calls File:Australian national route ALT1.svg. This is indeed hosted at Wikipedia. Uploading similar files is easy. Creating them isn't. Have you already created them? -- Hoary (talk) 09:34, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

No, but you need more shields, including: A30, A77, A96, B40, B44, B92, B401, B840, B861, B870, B989, C259, C308, C655, C989 and C996. Can you do it on Upload Screen? Mlik point (talk) 10:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

You have to create the SVG files, Mlik point. -- Hoary (talk) 11:24, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

It's like File:AUS Alphanumeric Route B870.svg. If you click on red link, you'll be straight to Upload Screen. Mlik point (talk) 11:59, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point No one has actually uploaded the file yet hence it is displayed as red link. You can do so by uploading the file, however before that, make sure to read WP:IUP. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:07, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point: (edit conflict) Because Wikipedia wants to have free content, not everything can be uploaded here. I suggest you start with Wikipedia:Image use policy (said page is for images, but the rules there apply for all other sorts of files as well). I reccommend that new users use the File Upload Wizard. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:57, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

This is, I believe, the third time that Mlik point has asked for people to do this. As I replied the first time, you can do this yourself - and, judginrg from the image description at File:AUS Alphanumeric Route A39.svg, the svg's are already there, and there is no copyright issue in Wikipedia as they are too simple to be protected by copyrightin the US (though apparently this is not clear in Australia, so Commons won't accept them). Mlik point, either do this yourself, or find a way of actually enrolling other editors who want to get involved. Simply asking random people to do something over and over again probably won't be very productive, and risks pissing people off. --ColinFine (talk) 14:40, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

How to redirect to Page?

When I Add [[ ]] to artical and write it does not redirect to that Page. How to fix that? Syed89 (talk) 10:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

For help in how to set up a redirect, try Help:Redirect. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:51, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Syed89, you can either Help:Redirect it or use a WP:Pipe trick, for example pipe reads more nicely than WP:Pipe, while both link to the same help page. Happy editing! ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I suspect that Syed89 doesn't mean "redirect" (which is a special term in Wikipedia) but is just asking about Wikilinks. What is the item you are trying to add, and to which page, Syed89? --ColinFine (talk) 14:46, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Editing semi-protected pages

Are we allowed to edit semi-protected pages (requires user, 4 days old and 10 edits)? Mlik point (talk) 12:08, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point If you are able to edit, then absolutely yes! In 1 more day your account will be WP:AUTOCONFIRM. Happy editing! Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:49, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Once you meet the criteria, Mlik point, then yes. But I would advise caution. Pages are semi-protected for a reason. Sometimes this is because of vandalism, and if you are editing in good faith, then that's fine. Other times they are protected because of a spate of good-faith but unhelpful (or even disruptive) edits - particularly if the article is on a controversial subject. In the latter case, I would advise any inexperienced editor to raise the edit they want to make on the talk page rather than boldly make the edit. --ColinFine (talk) 14:49, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Why does my edited keep getting deleted? Wiki: Jungkook

Hello, i recently saw that my edit on Jungkook was deleted. All i did was update the cover photo (that was from two years ago), specified his hometown and added one sentence to the original wiki page. As far as i'm concerned, there is sufficient evidence for my the sentence i mentioned and the picture came from wikipedia commons. I wonder why it has been removed and has reverted back to the original wiki? Xinlia97 (talk) 14:30, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Xinlia97. The image that you added has been flagged as a possible copyright violation on Wikimedia Commons and has been proposed for deletion there. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 14:37, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Xinlia97, I see that you are the editor who uploaded that image to Commons, which is credited to Big Hit Entertainment. What evidence do you have that this image is freely licensed under an acceptable Creative Commons license or equivalent? That looks like a copyright restricted image to me. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 14:43, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I am afraid I have tagged all of them for speedy deletion as a copyright infringment, because there is no evidence whatsoever of them being released under any free license (and in any case, commons policy requires evidence when an image previously appeared elsewhere). If those images are under a free license (not just publicitely available - see Gratis versus libre), follow the steps under the first paragraph of c:Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team#Licensing_images:_when_do_I_contact_VRT? (I have received permission from the original author (not me) to upload the file to Commons.) Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:08, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

About my sandbox after moving the article

I created an article in my sandbox. After that, I was able to move the article successfully, but my sandbox was used for redirection. I want to create another article in my sandbox. Can I delete what is written in my sandbox without permission? Could someone please tell me what I should do? Murasakihitsuji (talk) 17:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

You can either edit the redirect, and replace it with the article, or create a new article at User:Murasakihitsuji/sandbox2. ― Qwerfjkl talk 17:40, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Murasakihitsuji: You can add {{db-U1}} to any page in your own user space and an administrator will delete it for you. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 19:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@192.76.8.74, I don't think Murasakihitsuji wants to delete the page, just the text. ― Qwerfjkl talk 19:35, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Qwerfjkl: I thought they were asking how to delete the redirect that was left over from the page move. Both will accomplish the same thingc just depends if you want to have the redirect's page history in your new draft. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 19:39, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

192.76.8.74, nice to meet you and thank you for your advice. Qwerfjkl, nice to meet you and thank you for your advice. Yes, I am asking how to delete the redirect that was left over from the page move. To create a new article, I want to leave my sandbox empty. I asked for help here because I was worried that by turning off that redirect, it might have a negative impact on the articles I had successfully moved. Murasakihitsuji (talk) 10:38, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Murasakihitsuji: please see WP:EDRED on how to modify a redirect. Redirects are independent of whatever page they redirect to, even if they were created by a page move. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Victor Schmidt, nice to meet you. Thank you for your advice. I'll try it. Murasakihitsuji (talk) 15:10, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Edit Problem

When I edit something like image or a text in biography it is does not changed i reset cache but still this problem shows Please Help Me. Syed89 (talk) 13:13, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Syed89: Welcome to the Teahouse! Looking at your contributions, it appears that you are making changes to articles such as Lal Shahbaz Qalandar, Hasan ibn Ali, and Qasim ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr. Could you please provide more specifics? GoingBatty (talk) 13:57, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: I edit a image in Ja'far al-Sadiq but when i search in google it show the old image but when i go to the artical the image changes to my edited Image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syed89 (talk • contribs)

@Syed89: I see you successfully changed the image in the Ja'far al-Sadiq article earlier today. Wikipedia (and its volunteer editors) can not control how quickly Google updates their results. GoingBatty (talk) 16:53, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty:Ok Thanks for telling me i did not know that.

All Updates were Rejected

Hello, I made significant additions to a City wiki page that included numerous sources. I am the director of our local museum and in conjunction with our city government, local tourism, and historical society made updates to the "Guntersville, Alabama" page. I even corrected some misspelled names and deleted an outdated website. Many of our sources were local books by noted historians.

Photos used were mostly made by me with the exception of two which I purchased from the photographers. What gives? ALL UPDATES WERE REJECTED. 71.91.131.2 (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Could you kindly give us further clues as to where you made the edit or under what account you made them? This is the only edit made for the current IP you signed with. --ARose Wolf 16:34, 2 September 2021 (UTC) Nevermind, I see it. Blaze is correct below. It appears, by your own admission here, that you have a COI concerning the topic. Please look at the policy provided and follow all guidelines before making further edits to that article or any article related to Guntersville, Alabama. --ARose Wolf 16:40, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Please see WP:COI since it appears you have a conflict of interest with the topic. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 16:36, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

This appears to be about Guntersville, Alabama and the edits made by Gsvmuseum. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 16:40, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Get through the beauracracy stuff (User name change, declaring COI, possibly declaring PAID) and you should be able to try again. Make changes in segments. That way pieces may be reverted (with reasons given) and others not. David notMD (talk) 17:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Gsvmuseum: Welcome to the Teahouse and thanks for your interest in improving the article. Given your COI, I suggest suggesting improvements on the article's talk page - Talk:Guntersville, Alabama - with the {{request edit}} template and reliable sources. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:16, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Account was indeffed. Hopefully they will see the advice given and come back with a new account that meets requirements. I am sure they have a wealth of knowledge of that area and could learn some things from others here as well. --ARose Wolf 17:20, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Esav Marrakech

Hello guys lately I have created a page for a non profit private school in Marrakech and it been 2 week now when i submited to review but i got no reply from the team so i hope you guys can review it as soon as possible. talk 13:16, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Drafts are not reviewed in any order or on any deadline, sorry. DS (talk) 13:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Be patient. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 14:24, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse volunteers are not also reviewers. Well, a few are, but that is not why they are here. David notMD (talk) 14:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Submitted 8/24. Declined 8/25. Revised and resubmitted 8/25. I count that as one week. David notMD (talk) 15:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:There is no deadline. We are all volunteers here, and we all must decide on the best way to spend our time here. It will be reviewed when someone gets around to it. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

FYI

– Combined sections about same topic by the same person. GoingBatty (talk) 17:24, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey guys i recently created a article about private school and when i submited to review first time get rejected and then i added a improvement to it so i hope can meet the critiria of articles in main space i want you guys to tell me your feedback on it is it become better now or it need more adjustement. Thanks you talk 14:39, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

HellmuSa Courtesy: Draft:Esav Marrakech. And we are not all guys. David notMD (talk) 15:39, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@David notMDDoes it look good?? talk 15:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Needs more content and refs about the school. Documenting that it exists and how it came to exist are not enough. David notMD (talk) 15:54, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@HellmuSa: Does the school use "Esav" or "ESAV"? The draft should be internally consistent. Is the "View of ESAV school entry" a photograph or an artistic creation? Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:58, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty yes it is just an artistic creation for it but the real name is Esav. talk 17:04, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@HellmuSa: Thank you. I moved the image back out of the infobox, since a photograph of the school could be used in the infobox. You can change each instance of "ESAV" to "Esav". Also, I think the infobox language field should be "French" instead of "francophone". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:14, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Thanks that really help. talk 17:18, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

New topic

Hello, I was wondering if you are notified about your edits being reverted? WikiJanitorPerson (talk) 18:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You are not automatically notified, but you can set up that type of notification. Happy editing and see you around! Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 18:41, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletions to edits I made

I updated the page for my grandfather James Bell footballer from documents and photos in my possession along with facts from a published book where I quoted the ISBN number.

Why were all my amendments deleted when I was adding information from my own family archives?

I have either original documents or copies and all the facts are already in the public domain. GaryPBell66 (talk) 20:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)Gary Bell

Please see WP:COI because you have a conflict of interest because of your relation to him. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 20:04, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@GaryPBell66 welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst @Blaze The Wolf was right to point out that you do have a 'conflict of interest', more to the point is the fact that Wikipedia can only accept additions that can be verified by anyone with access to a library and/or the internet from properly published sources, not personal archives or the memories of people that knew the subject. This can be frustrating to someone such as yourself who could, theoretically, populate an article with all sorts of interesting facts. But because anyone could, in theory, add just about anything on that basis to any article, we have to create rules about needing sources to verify what is inserted. It looks like most of your additions were not supported in this way, so would have been summarily removed. With over 6.2 million articles to maintain, I'm afraid sometimes that reverting process does come across as a little terse. But the ratio of editors to articles means we rarely have time to explain in subtle terms why such well-meaning additions cannot be accepted. Kind regards. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:33, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia has rules and guidelines that can appear obtuse for new editors. For example, at James Bell (footballer, born 1883) you claimed the photos were your "own work" when they were clearly taken more than 100 years ago. You added content without providing references at the same time, and you added content that can not be verified by publicly available documentation. Your content is not 'lost', as it can be retrieved from View history. A path open to you is to copy that into your Sandbox and then learn how to make it acceptable. David notMD (talk) 21:09, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Public Domain pictures

Are all pics in Wikipedia in Public domain ? Can they be used for commercial products like notebooks ? Thanks. Mexbob52 (talk) 20:57, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mexbob52: Some are public domain, most are not. Most have a free license that requires you to give attribution to the author if you use the picture. Some pictures are commercial fair use and have restricted on how you can use them. Click on an image to open up the image page and you will see the licensing information. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:10, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mexbob52: Just going to add that while Wikipedia editors generally try to avoid mistakes when it comes to things like image licensing, all editors are WP:VOLUNTEERs and can offer no real legal advice when it comes to such things. This means that you probably also should be diligent and careful when it comes to re-using the images you find uploaded here. Don’t just automatically assume it’s OK because of how the file is licensed on Wikipedia. If it turns out that there are problems arising from how you re-use an image, you will be the one responsible for resolving it. There are many issues related to image re-use that go beyond simple copyright matters and you will be the one who needs to figure out how or whether any of them apply to your situation. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:41, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Date of birth. What is a reliable source?

Hello, just wondering, if I`ll create a new article about a living person, who is definitely notable, has plenty of reliable resources in mainstream media, newspapers but I have no reliable source (not even any kind of source) of their date of birth. Should I just not mention the date of birth in the infobox? DillonPalm (talk) 14:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

That is correct, DillonPalm. You should never put deliberately in an article something that does is not verifiable.

For the specific case of dates of birth and some other biographical information, we have in addition WP:BLPPRIVACY which encourages editors to only put down the year, even when day/month could be sourced reliably. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:51, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Tigraan! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DillonPalm (talk • contribs) 22:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Doha Moustaquim

Hello Wiki Team, Recemtly i creat a page about a biography of Moroccan artist and it got declinde first time and then i rewritted in other version so guys can you tell me your opinion about the latest edit and your notes are important to me. Thanks you all talk 18:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@HellmuSa: It appears there are some unreferenced sentences in the Biography section. I don't understand whether the "field of illness" is medicine or research or making films about diseases or something else. Film titles should be italicized and not in all capital letters. Phrases such as "Faced and its inspiration." and "Growing up among many Moroccans." are not complete sentences, so they should be reworded. Also, could you please adjust your signature so your username will be visible when you post on talk pages? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 19:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Thanks i will next time. @Hellmusa talk 19:37, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@HellmuSa: If you are manually creating your signature on each post, you should instead sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~, and Wikipedia will automatically expand it for you. I also suggest you update the references in your draft so they each have a |website= or |publisher= parameter, and that each non-English reference has |language= and |trans-title= parameters. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 19:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty am so thankfull men i really i appreciated your help.~~~~ talk 19:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks men~~~~. HellmuSa (talk) 19:51, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@HellmuSa: When signing your posts, don't use the <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags. Those tags are just used to demonstrate the code. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Persistent incorrect edits from changing IP addresses

The page Rose Parade is being repeatedly edited by an ever changing cast of IPv6 addresses -- but since they are all from the same geographic area, making essentially the same change, I strongly suspect they are all the same person. This person keeps asserting, with no evidence, and contrary to current evidence, that the 2022 parade will be cancelled due to COVID-19 (and once, the 2024 parade(!)). Another editor and I have made some changes to the page to make it more apparent that the 2022 parade is currently expected to happen, but the IP editor seems impervious to these changes and the many, many reverts we have done; I'm pretty much past assuming good faith. In the rare cases where the same IP address (usually an IPv4 address) has made other edits, most of those have been bad as well, and there have been warnings given. I'm at a loss how to address this, since almost every edit has come from a different IP address, so there's no point in putting a warning on the talk pages, and there's no point in IP banning. Help! Floatjon (talk) 23:04, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Floatjon: You can make a request at WP:RFPP for the page to be semiprotected to restrict edits by IP editors. RudolfRed (talk) 00:01, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Editing extended protected pages

Are we allowed to edit extended protected pages (requires user, 30 days old and 500 edits)? Mlik point (talk) 00:32, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Do you meet the requirements? If no, then no. (Generally speaking, pages are put under XCP as part of discretionary sanctions.) —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 00:51, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Mlik point, the great majority of your recent edits have been to the Teahouse, or asking other people to do things, or both. I suggest that you try editing a non-problematic (not semi-protected) article, of course basing your edits on specified, reliable sources. -- Hoary (talk) 01:27, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

The Teahouse?

What is the Teahouse? I was recently invited here, is this place accessible without an invite? PyroCraiglist (talk) 01:37, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, @PyroCraiglist:! The Teahouse is a friendly place to ask questions about Wikipedia and editing Wikipedia. You were invited here because you are a new editor, and you may find this a helpful place to ask questions along your journey as a Wikipedia editor. We're glad you're here and please don't hesitate to ask questions. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 02:05, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@PyroCraiglist: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia:Teahouse is accessible by everyone to use without an invite. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:07, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

I want to create an article that's why I need to know according to Wikipedia which new sources are reliable. Can anyone say that how can I check particular website are reliable or not. २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 22:24, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

You'd better start by assuming that any website is unreliable for any purpose, until you have good reason to believe that it is reliable for your purpose. Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources, which is necessarily rather long and complex. -- Hoary (talk) 22:36, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

There is also WP:RSP which lists many sources that the community regards as reliable and unreliable, but for your purpose in writing about a new TV show in India, it is unlikely that sources you find would be listed there. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:12, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Picture question

I posted a picture in an edit. I didn't see any way to indicate pic was in public domain, so I said it was my creation. Got flagged for deletion. how to fix this?? is public domain! Stemgoo (talk) 16:27, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Stemgoo Welcome to Tea House! Next time, please link to the image or edit in question, which is this File:Pre-killings photo of the Dhaka terrorists in front of ISIS symbol.jpg, this image is NOT in public domain. The copyright of the image most likely belongs to Al-Hayat Media Center, an ISIS publication. I found the image here. You should apologise for trying to deceive fellow editors about the licensing of an image, and ask for help next time instead, if you think an image may have licensing issues. This image is definitely not public domain, but you could argue for a Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria rationale. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 16:39, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Stemgoo. The term "public domain" has a specfic meaning when it comes to image licensing and this meaning can vary from coountry to country depending upon the relevant copyright laws, and it doesn't mean "publically available" in the sense that you find an image posted somewhere online and you can view or even download it free of charge; public domain has to do with the copyright status of the image. Why do you think the file you've uploaded falls within the public domain? Did you see something posted somewhere which explicitly stated it was as such or did you just assume that to automatically be the case? As explained here, pretty much all images you find online are going to be assumed to be protected by copyright unless it clearly states otherwise. So, take a look at WP:Public domain, and try and clarify why you think this photo is public domain.

Please understand that Commons only accepts files whose licenses satisfy c:Commons:Licensing. In addition, Commons and Wikipedia are separate websites and any issues with Commons files need to be resolved on Commons. So, go to c:File:Pre-killings photo of the Dhaka terrorists in front of ISIS symbol.jpg, click on the "Challenge speedy deletion" button and follow the instructions that appear and explain why you feel the photo is public domain. You can also follow the instructions given in the notification left for you at c:User talk:Stemgoo. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:14, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Editing fully-protected pages

Are we allowed to edit fully-protected for administrators? Mlik point (talk) 02:26, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point Please read WP:PPLIST and WP:UAL if you further questions regarding user rights and page protection. The short answer to your questions is Yes, fully-protected pages or articles can only be edited by administrators. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 02:32, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

And Mlik point, please read the advice I gave you just a short while ago. -- Hoary (talk) 04:55, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

how remove external link in source editing?

in visual editing clicking link symbol will let to you convert external link to plain text. for example: [http://unlikely.net.au Unlikely Journal for Creative Arts] to "Unlikely Journal for Creative Arts". clicking link button in source editong provides option for inserting link only! how can i remove link in source editing? 28au21 (talk) 05:04, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@28au21 Not sure if this is what you wanted, take [http://unlikely.net.au Unlikely Journal for Creative Arts] for example, simply remove the squared brackets manually and also the URL, the ending result should look like this Unlikely Journal for Creative Arts. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:14, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Maintenance tags

Hello. Hope you're well? Just a quick question. How often do tags get reviewed? I keep finding ones that I don't think are accurate? I don't know how long they've been there? But many seem out-of-date. What is the process for flagging these and getting them reviewed? Thanks! BorleyBoy (talk) 19:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@BorleyBoy: Actually, there is no official review process or official flagging process. Maintenance tags are usually add when an article has some issues that should be addressed and then they just stick there until they're either removed or the issues are fixed. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 20:04, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Blaze!

@BorleyBoy Welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst we do have a small number of 'wikignomes' who like working through groups of templated articles and fixing things, in general we all make our individual assessments of whether or not the template is still relevant. That does takes a degree of experience so, as a very new user, if you think a template is wrong, you could raise it at the article's talk page. But for poorly visited, esoteric articles, you might find no-one responds. So, having assured yourself that the template is no longer relevant any more, you could 'boldly' remove it, providing you explain your reasoning with a good edit summary. If you want us to check that you've done it ok, just pop back any time and give us a link to the article, and we can tell you if we agree with your assessment. I hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:15, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Much obliged, Nick!

@BorleyBoy: As a complete aside, can I ask why you gave yourself that username, as I see you've made a few edits to the Borley Rectory article? You might (or might not!) be interested to know that my mother was the artist who created the book jacket illustration for James Turner's 'My Life with Borley Rectory', and I still have all her original drawings that she produced for this and many other Bodley Head publications in the 1950s. (Totally off-topic, of course!) Nick Moyes (talk) 20:23, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

That is amazing. That is the same picture I have as my Facebook background currently. I would buy the book, but it costs like £130! It is such a great cover. I am currently writing a podcast about Borley and doing daily research. What a strange thing! Thanks, Nick! You've slightly blown my mind, but anyway...

I put this up on Instagram last week: https://www.instagram.com/p/CSqkKLVj4fM/?utm_medium=copy_link

Superb stuff! She'd be so pleased to see it being used. Please post or email me a link to your podcast when it's done - I'd love to listen to it. Mum often used to put my dad's initials (C.A.S.M.) into some of her book jacket illustrations, but I suspect she felt adding it to a gravestone was not appropriate for a newly-wed artist and her ex-navy husband. Last time I looked, the book was selling for around 80 quid on eBay, but that was quite some time ago. It's a really hilarious read, too. (I've already told her grandchildren never simply to chuck out her artwork and illustrated books when I'm dead and gone! LOL). Nick Moyes (talk) 22:28, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Nick. I'm only writing episode 4 of 6 - the Foyster tenancy with the wall writing. I will need to invest in the book. Didn't think it could really live up to the cover though! It is so so good. Anyway, thanks again. Edward — Preceding unsigned comment added by BorleyBoy (talk • contribs) 08:02, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Suggestion for a change to a template

Is this the wrong place for me to offer a suggestion?

If so (OR, if this idea has already been "considered" and rejected ... or if I have committed some other faux pas ... then) please forgive me.

The suggestion is: to allow a field value called "paywall" for the value of a "url-status" field.

The "EDIT comment" for THIS edit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Political_family&diff=prev&oldid=1041653991

contains a "NOTE:" that is intended to illustrate the motivation for the suggestion.

The suggestion is also [sorta] contained (or maybe ...'explained') in a comment inside [the value of] the "url-status" field of the 'ref' tag that was modified during that edit.

-- Mike Schwartz (talk) 19:36, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mike Schwartz: Welcome to the Teahouse! There's already a parameter called |url-access= for this - see Template:Cite web#Access indicators for url-holding parameters. If you go to Template:Cite web and click on the "Talk" tab, you'll be redirected to Help talk:Citation Style 1, which is the proper place to offer a suggestion for citation templates like {{cite web}}. In this particular case, I'm not sure the |url-access= is appropriate, as I can access the URL as 1 of 3 free stories this month. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thank you for that kind (and speedy) response.

I don't think "|url-access=" is appropriate for the situation I was facing. There was no one holding a gun to prevent anyone from "ever" being able to access the primary ("non-" archived) web page, at the URL in the "url" field. [One might even be able to do so without paying any money! if they could do so without running afoul of the three-times-per-month limitation.] It's just that the reason for making the URL in the "archive-url" field primary, ... does exist (it's explained somewhere ... iirc in the "EDIT comment" mentioned above).

When I say << "making the URL in the "archive-url" field primary" >> I mean ... what happens when one uses "| url-status = dead" [which is appropriate only if the original web page has been moved or deleted ... right?]. Does the same thing happen when one uses "| url-status = unfit"? I think it does. But I was hoping for an option that would cause that same thing to happen, when one uses some other value for that "| url-status " field, ... a value that would not be making a false accusation, but would just be explaining what the good reason is, in a certain case, for << "making the URL in the "archive-url" field primary" >>.

In today's world, that good reason did get stated, (or, "recorded" or 'documented'); but ...only in the comment inside [the value of] a certain "url-status" field. Wouldn't it be better, to be able to say "| url-status = paywall" or "| url-status = limited-access"? (or ...something like that?)

Just my 0.02. YMMV. --Mike Schwartz (talk) 06:00, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

--Matthiaspaul (talk) 08:03, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

I would like to create a page of my own

I have not yet thought of a post but I use Wikipedia daily. I would like to have something of my own for all to be able to see. Once I have my topic, I would like to know what are the steps to get my post approved? Leader Rui (talk) 07:50, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Leader Rui. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Ownership of content because it sort of sounds like you misunderstanding some important things about Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:55, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Leader Rui If you want to start a WP-article, first make sure you have the sources demanded at WP:GNG, otherwise you are wasting time. Then see guidance at WP:YFA. Being able to add references properly is essential, see WP:REFBEGIN and WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:04, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Notability check for a potential article

I'm looking to write an article about two Michelin star restaurant in San Francisco called Californios. Chef Val Cantu has many mentions in prestigious Food & Wine publications along with Michelin's guides. He also participated in MasterChef as a Chef judge. Katie.Kroshka (talk) 22:11, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse and thanks for your question. If you are affiliated with Cantu or the restaurant, please disclose your conflict of interest before editing or creating an article on the restaurant or the subject. Please read this section on the notability guidelines for companies, ~~and this section for restaurants in particular.~~ Other notability considerations apply if you decide to try to write an article about Cantu himself. If you have further questions, feel free to respond. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 22:22, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Katie.Kroshka, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afriad that "mentions" are not enough: are there places where people unconnected with the restaurant have written at some length about it (and not just repeating what it says about itself)? --ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: I would think that a restaurant rated two stars in the Michelin Guide is likely to be notable. There are only about 400 of them on the planet. I would be surprised if significant coverage cannot be found, although it may be obscure foodie reviews, because typically a 2-star restaurant is priced out of the range of most people, where a fine dinner for two can cost $2000. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:21, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Katie.Kroshka, I disagree completely with the initial feedback offered above, and agree with Anachronist. Any restaurant on Planet Earth with two Michelin stars is pretty much guaranteed to have significant coverage in reliable, independent sources sufficient to establish notability. These are fine dining restaurants at the pillar of success and worldwide acclaim. To start, consider this review: In a new SoMa space, Californios cements a grand vision of Latin American fine dining, (July 2, 2021), Soleil Ho, San Francisco Chronicle. Then, consider this review which calls it "the best Mexican restaurant in America", and this and this. I have no doubt that this restaurant is notable and ought to have a Wikipedia article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:47, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

In the spirit of full disclosure, I wrote the biography of restaurant critic Soleil Ho. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:50, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

That's actually less expensive than I expected. $300-$700 for a dinner for two. Although that's probably without wine pairings for each item you eat, which would jack up the cost (for example, a full tasting-menu dinner for two at Chez TJ, a one-star place local to me, can cost $1500 after tax and gratuity). ~Anachronist (talk) 03:16, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Anachronist@Cullen328@Katie.Kroshka I completely agree that any two 2 Michelin restaurant is notable. You can find existing articles at Category:Michelin Guide starred restaurants by country to get a sense of writing style and quality. I imagine such articles potentially risk being written in vanity/promotional way so reading up on Wikipedia:Neutral point of view would be of extra essence. Good luck editing! ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 08:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Gradient rings in preview generated on Wikipedia android

Hi,

         Article: MasterChef India – Telugu
         Screenshot: https://ibb.co/6D79GTv

If i use android app to view this page, gardient ring effect is occurring on infobox image preview shown on the top of the article. The infobox image is an svg file on commons[9]. But any of it's generated files in various resolutions had no such problem. Is this a bug, please help. Anoop (talk) 02:19, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Anoopspeaks. Generally, the people who answer questions at the Teahouse are knowledgeable about editing Wikipedia and its policies, but not about how the software works, or possible bugs. WP:VPT is a better place for such questions. --ColinFine (talk) 10:11, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks.Anoop (talk) 10:51, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

How can i declare Conflict of interest

please help me with my drafts I really don't understand where I am going wrong I know there is not reliable sources but if I add reliable and authentic sources what else I have to change. Nihara.widefy (talk) 03:36, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

For help in how to declare a conflict of interest, please read WP:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:04, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Nihaha.widefy - If you know that there are not reliable sources, why do you keep resubmitting the same drafts? Also, the message that you posted to my talk page is inconsistent. You say that you do not have a conflict of interest, but you also included a conflict of interest box. Are you having difficulty in understanding the questions that we are asking? Robert McClenon (talk) 05:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Independent from the key question of notability, you have many, many errors in grammar, lack of or excessive capitalization, repetition of content, refs at section titles, etc. A constant piece of advice given to new editors is to put in months of improving existing articles, as a means of learning how to create content that is not reverted. You, however, immediately started by creating three new articles, which have collectively accrued eight Declines. You are wasting your time and the time of reviewers. I suggest you stop working on your drafts (or at least, stop resubmitting those), and put in months of improving existing articles. Drafts left fallow have six months before being deleted, so you have time. David notMD (talk) 12:08, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Nihara.widefy: And even if the draft is deleted after six months, they are easy to recover once you are experienced and ready to start working on them again. See WP:REFUND for details. ~Anachronist (talk) 13:01, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Need clarification

My One article was rejected. According to the Afc reviewer, this article has no reliable source. I want to know that, why this source are not reliable ? I need Clarification with one reason. Article Link = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sushma_Adhikari Jaintnp (talk) 12:33, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Declined (twice), not Rejected. Two weaknesses mentioned by the reviewers: refs do not establish her career as being notable, and refs not reliable sources. On the first point, I agree that her career as a model and appearing in (not performing in) music videos is not notable, nor, to date, her work in film. David notMD (talk) 12:44, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Jaintnp: Welcome to the Teahouse! The message at the top of your draft states "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources", which is not the same as "This article has no reliable source". The reviewer also left some comments about your draft, which have been moved to Draft talk:Sushma Adhikari. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:09, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible

Is it possible to create pages in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia about various things and people (including of Chinese origin) with bringing reliable sources

Hello. My major languages used in the Wikipedia are Ukrainian, Bulgarian, Croatian, and Chinese. For the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia, is it suitable to create a page about various things and people, which also include Chinese ones, with bringing reliable sources? Hrvatskiukrajinski (talk) 10:49, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Hrvatskiukrajinski Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds to me like you should be able to do that, but you will need to ask on the Ukrainian Wikipedia what can be done there. Every language version of Wikipedia is its own project, with their own editors and policies. 331dot (talk) 10:52, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

You have to ask about Ukrainian-language Wikipedia on Ukrainian-language Wikipedia. en-WP has no authority over it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:52, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Can you please help to bring me to the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia to ask questions there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrvatskiukrajinski (talk • contribs) 10:59, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

The Ukrainian help desk is at uk:Вікіпедія:Кнайпа_(допомога). --David Biddulph (talk) 11:10, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

I suspect this new account is a block evasion of User:Adamdaniel864, who was indef blocked for abusing multiple accounts. (Also blocked at Ukranian Wikipedia.) The claims of interest in the above-mentioned languages is WP:DUCK. David notMD (talk) 12:22, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, I had a similar thought. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Believe me. I never mean to declare anything bad and I even bring reliable sources. Although I'm different, I'm very interested in Ukrainian because the language has a lot of specialities, such as the alphabet ї, and even г is h. I'm very new. I'm very interested to edit many new pages in the Ukrainian, Bulgarian, Croatian, and Chinese-language Wikipedia. Could you please allow me? How to remove all my old accounts? Can you please help me to remove all old accounts and set only one new account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrvatskiukrajinski (talk • contribs) 12:56, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Hrvatskiukrajinski: accounts cannot be deleted. By making more and more accounts you only dig yourself further into the hole. Please stop creating any further accounts, because blocks apply per person, not per account, meaning as long as Adamdaniel864 is blocked (and globally locked), you're not welcome to edit here. While its theoretically possible to appeal the global lock via email, to stewards

wikimedia.org, I do not think that you will be sucessfull with appealing the lock at any time soon. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:14, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

You are continuing to attempt to evade a block. I have blocked this latest account of yours. Please read User talk:Adamdaniel864#August 2021 very carefully. Do not attempt to respond or react to it in any way. A day later, read it again, very carefully. When you're sure that you understand what it says, take the advice that it provides. -- Hoary (talk) 13:15, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Notifications by specific editors

Can editors be requested to stop pinging me? I've had some issues with certain editors and was wondering if it is possible for them to stop involving me in discussions and getting personal on their responses? Not gonna name editors just asking if it's possible or to block them? 🐉 DragonofBatley (talk) 14:10, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

You can turn off notifications by inserting them into the box labeled "Ignored users" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo and saving your preferences (but you could try asking them politely first) Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:15, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt: thanks for the information — Preceding unsigned comment added by DragonofBatley (talk • contribs) 14:17, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Random IP user talking to me for seemingly no reason

So a short time after I registered my account, I got a message from a random IP (82.28.152.167), saying hello. I decided to assume the best and say hello back, seeing as it was the first time an actual person put something on my talk page. Today, several days later, they said, “I will make a Wikipedia account soon, to join you in editing.” (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:The_Council_of_Seraphim?markasread=226986219&markasreadwiki=enwiki#Hello)

I checked their contributions and talk page and they have not done this to anyone else recently—they also have some warnings for disruptive editing. What do I do? I find it strange and slightly disconcerting that they randomly messaged me, a new account. The Council of Seraphim | speak before the Council 18:52, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

That IP geolocates to the Reading (Berkshire) area (though it's an inexact science). I don't of course know (or want to know) where you are, but if you are similarly located or have connections there, it could be someone who knows you and that you've started editing here. Edits have been made via this IP for over 4 months, but it might well be dynamic, so they do not necessarily all come from the same person. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.0.2 (talk) 19:16, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm nowhere near Reading. I'm sure I don't know anyone there. Thanks for the help, though. What now? The Council of Seraphim | speak before the Council 19:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@The Council of Seraphim Just ignore any message of that type that you have no real need to respond to. You are not obliged to respond to random 'hellos'. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:50, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Article Rating Unknown

Could someone please help me regarding the rating of this article? I was accepted for this article and on the talk page, the person who accepted it did not specify the rating of the article, could someone please rate this talk page? Seb { 💬 Talk + 📝 Edits } 17:55, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Seb: I would probably say it's a start class article. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 18:36, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

While I agree it's probably start class, it doesn't surprise me that no-one from the relevant Projects has yet come around to rate it, as it was only moved to main Space yesterday. In my experience, it can take a few days before someone experienced rates new articles. If you want to raise its profile, I suggest you think up a "Did you know" for it (see WP:DYK). Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:42, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Rated. ― Qwerfjkl talk 20:16, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Waves New user here

Hello! I am new here. Just joined, in fact. I read that this is a good place to begin: [Tutorial]. While I do that, can you guys please tell me what else I should do to understand Wikipedia editing, the policies and all? Thanks! TheCuriousBasha (talk) 21:13, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

TheCuriousBasha Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You may find the new user tutorial helpful. 331dot (talk) 21:18, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Dover Corporation Relevant Edits

Courtesy link: Dover Corporation
Hello,

I have submitted multiple requests for edits to the Dover Corporation Wikipedia page, trying my best to follow formatting and reference guidelines, but I have had trouble getting these changes approved.

My last edit request stalled due to referencing Dover's Form 10-K SEC filing, but I replied with updated references and have yet to receive a response. My initial edits have been focused on the intro paragraph of the Wikipedia page, and I would also like to provide updated financial numbers because revenue and other financials on the page are from 2013-14. My only wish is to present factually correct information because Dover, the parent company of my employer OPW, is publicly traded and may be misrepresented by outdated information and financial numbers.

Would someone be able to review my last request on the Dover Corporation Talk page? I would like to make sure I am following the right procedures to provide factual updates without being considered promotional or PR.

Lisa Moloney, Global Communications Manager OPW, A Dover Company LisaMoloney (talk) 20:14, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@LisaMoloney Have you declared your COI? ― Qwerfjkl talk 20:17, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Talk:Dover Corporation ― Qwerfjkl talk 20:19, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Would this be the proper way to disclose COI? {{paid|user=Lisa Moloney|employer=OPW, a Dover Company}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by LisaMoloney (talk • contribs)

Yes, but on your user page. 331dot (talk) 21:35, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you - my user page is now updated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:LisaMoloney What should my next step be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LisaMoloney (talk • contribs) 21:37, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Did you like Wikipedia?

How was Wikipedia going?

Good or Tired? Mlik point (talk) 02:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Mlik point, are you looking for some help, or just shooting the breeze? -- Hoary (talk) 02:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm happy doing editor. Mlik point (talk) 02:52, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point Just stick to the former, please. See WP:NOTSOCIAL. The Nick Moyes (talk) 04:14, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point: If you're looking to chat with other editors, you might be interested in Wikipedia:IRC or Wikipedia:Discord. GoingBatty (talk) 04:10, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

→→→→It is goodOyiriola (talk) 21:42, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

ClueBot III

Ive started using ClueBot III to archive my talk page but it hasn't done so have I entered the code incorrectly? StarryNightSky11^(talk) 21:34, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@StarryNightSky11: ClueBot III will take a while to do the first archive (up to 2 weeks iirc). Wait a bit and see if if works; if it doesn't, try substituting in Template:Setup auto archiving, or you're free to copy the syntax on my talk page, which has been working fine for a long time. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 22:55, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

NASASpaceFlight being tagged for promo

Hello, a few weeks ago, I set out rewriting the NASASpaceFlight Article, which at that point was basically in a stub. I was aware that it could easily read like an ad, but I'm actually not sure, which exact area needs improvement in that regard now that the maintenance template is back. I tried my best to be neutral about the writing and collaborate sources that verify that the history as told occurred. I could see over sourcing as an issue, but on that, I'd like a 2nd read. Could someone here take a look at that, please? Thanks. Hendrikharry (talk) 19:50, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Hendrikharry: Thanks for working on the article. I see that you cite a lot of information to NSF itself, which is poor practice per WP:PRIMARY. We do not care about what the subject has to say about itself people tend to see themselves only in a good light, and you'll reflect that bias in your own writing if you only use primary sources. Instead, we want to cite information to independent, secondary sources. While I appreciate your efforts, it's best for the article if you could remove information only attributed to NSF and see what's left. There's a possibility that the article will be much shorter (again), which is perfectly okay. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 22:38, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: While I understand that primary sources are to be handled with care, in this case, don't they fall under the statement of facts insofar as it proves a verifiable chronology of events? And as for details on the site itself, if there are no external reviews or references, would that mean that such sections need to be skipped? --Hendrikharry (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Hendrikharry: But here's the thing: you are interpreting the sources. When you say that NSF "gained the attention" of somebody, that's something we need an independent source to determine if it was only NSF or other factors coming into play. For the SpaceX video restoration: who determined that the video was "clear", or that the article was "detailed"? For the livestreams: who said that the video quality "increased" and how do you know? On a deeper level, you are also deciding what stories to include and what to omit, which can introduce a type of bias known as undue weight. You are picking the articles published by NSF and determining if they're noteworthy enough to be in an encyclopedia entry about them. On Wikipedia, we offload that decision making to secondary sources, preferably more than one, and reflect the events chosen by those secondary sources. There is a reason why WP:PRIMARY says to "not base an entire article on primary sources". As for the second question: yes. By the way, listing the other news outlets read like promotional content. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 23:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: I see where you are going. Thanks for giving me something to think about (and removing that section) --Hendrikharry (talk) 01:35, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Extended-protected for COVID-19

Why is Article are extended-protected for COVID-19? Mlik point (talk) 01:51, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point: Looking at the article history, I see it was protected in this edit, and its edit summary led me to the conversation at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive/2021/06#COVID-19. You can make suggestions at Talk:COVID-19 using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. Happy editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoingBatty (talk • contribs) 02:04, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protected for COVID-19 pandemic

Why is Article are extended confirmed protected for COVID-19 pandemic? Mlik point (talk) 02:12, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Changed from Semi-protected to Extended confirmed in mid-April, after some contentious editing. David notMD (talk) 02:20, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I think that User:Mlik point may be asking about the process or policy. Read the protection policy, which explains that pages are protected to prevent edit-warring. Semi-protection is common for contentious articles. A few subject areas have to be protected at a higher level, typically extended-confirmed protection, because single-purpose accounts game auto-confirmation, by creating an account and making the required edits, and then edit disruptively. It is unfortunate that some articles have to be protected in this way, but it would be worse for them to be subject to frequent edit-warring. As noted, editors who have not become extended-confirmed can still request and discuss on the article talk page. COVID-19 and COVID-19 pandemic are among the most contentious areas, as are certain areas that are subject to battleground editing because they are real battlegrounds, such as Palestine and Israel and India and Pakistan. Maybe that was the question. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:18, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Needs update Google Maps Street View

We need to update Google Maps Street View. Can you do it? Mlik point (talk) 02:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Do you have a question about reading or editing Wikipedia? Robert McClenon (talk) 04:06, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Did you mean the Google Maps GUI on this website? Or the articles itself that you linked to? --Pink Saffron (talk) 04:14, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, we need update Google Maps Street View. Mlik point (talk) 04:47, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point Not exactly sure what you meant by update. If you want Google Maps and Street Views to be updated then you have to contact Google about it as we have no control on what Google does. If you are talking about the article, you can go ahead and exercise BOLD on Google Maps and Street View provided you have reliable source to support the changes you want to make even if it is a fact as per WP:FACTCHECK. In addition, it has come to my attention that you have been asking other editors to do your work such as with Template talk:AUshield even after they (the editor you ping) have reverted your request which I assumed they reject to do so which the history logs seemingly confirm that. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:01, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Post Formatting

Hey how do you format your posts properly on mobile? Bhrajesh Kumar Mishra (talk) 23:06, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bhrajesh Kumar Mishra: I'm sorry, but I don't understand your question since Wikipedia doesn't have "posts". Which article are you trying to edit, and what exactly are you trying to do? I will say that page formatting on mobile is extremely difficult to get right, and I edit exclusively on desktop. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 23:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

No I'm talking about page formatting. Like editing this page. Could you please send me a guide? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhrajesh Kumar Mishra (talk • contribs) 04:13, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Bhrajesh Kumar Mishra: Welcome to the Teahouse. You might be looking for the cheatsheet. If you're looking for help on properly indenting comments, see WP:INDENT. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:35, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

How do you add Pictures to your page/ profile?!

Mystic880 (talk) 05:20, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Please start by making constructive edits to articles. You have made none so far. (Your edits have been reverted.) -- Hoary (talk) 05:53, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

YouTube Videos as reference

Hey Y'all! I was wondering if YouTube is an acceptable source to cite. Thanks for your time and help!! MicahLuv (talk) 06:12, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Please see WP:YOUTUBE, MicahLuv. If it doesn't answer your question, feel free to add a follow-up question. -- Hoary (talk) 06:17, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Regarding MKBHD

Hello, I want to edit for MKBHD aka Marques Brownlee. He made a controversial video on Apple Chipgate on Oct 16, 2015, where the information provided is totally wrong. Wikipedia is not allowing to edit. Pls look into the issue. Sg54sg (talk) 06:55, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Sg54sg Please follow the instructions you've been given in response to your edit request at Talk:Marques Brownlee. Also note that Wikipedia is not for correcting other people's Youtube messages.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:11, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have done everything. Still not happening. I think it should be published in the controversies tab. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sg54sg (talk • contribs)

I need a bit of advice/mentoring

I don't know what to do. A while back, I got mixed up in the Articles for Deletion debate on Maureen Mbondiah (the AfD wasn't nominated by me, I just weighed in after). The debate was closed as no consensus, which is fine. But I don't know how much post-debate activity is allowed or appropriate? I don't want to hound the subject or those who are writing the article. On the other hand, the remaining article is niggling at me in a very annoying way. It introduces Mbondiah as the founder and operations director of Dravens healthcare. Now whatever she's notable for, it's not Draven's healthcare, which is such a tiny company that it's described in the UK as a "micro entity", with a turnover so small it's allowed to submit a miniaturised version of accounts to companies house. I think its turnover is less than £300K, which even given the appalling rates of pay to healthcare workers means it can't be employing more than 10 full-time equivalents, and its business (supplying agency staff to health-care) is completely run-of-the-mill. The reference supporting its activities is a job recruitment advert the company published, which is not independent. And the final sentence "In 2020 she became the first Zimbabwean in the United Kingdom to launch a franchise for her company Dravens Healthcare" makes little sense to me. I'm not sure what a franchise means for a company like this; it's not like Kentucky Fried Chicken, a global brand that offers people the opportunity to have a franchise restaurant. Part of me is itching to get rid of the job-advert reference, the last sentence, and possibly the whole mention of Dravens healthcare. Is it appropriate to put non-notable activities in articles about notable people (the fact she's got an article must mean the consensus is she's notable, presumably for her awards and philanthropic work)? Is this just a stick I should drop? Am I being unfair? Honestly, I don't want to sabotage an article just because I think it should probably have been deleted, so I sort of feel my hands are tied; but it just doesn't seem right, when others whose claim to notability seem much stronger are regularly getting trimmed. Mbondiah also had a string of awards in the original article, many of which were in good faith untraceable, mistakes, over-blown, or in a few cases, with bad faith on my part, outright fabrications; I left one with a citation-needed tag as I can't trace it but wasn't 100% certain it was a fabrication; but no citation has appeared; how long should such tags remain before the unsupported information is removed? I am Confused! I would ask at the talk-page, but the only people with any interest in Mbondiah are those who wrote the stuff that I'm dubious about. And also, it's more a question about me than the article: is it best, post AfD, just to walk away, and leave others to handle the article? Elemimele (talk) 19:17, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Elemimele: AfD only determines whether or not the article should exist and should not have any influence on the article content itself. Discussions on article content go on the talk page instead. I see you did find the talk page and left some messages there, but nobody's responded: that's fine, it often happens on low-traffic pages. I suggest you to follow the bold, revert, discuss cycle and implement the changes you'd like to see yourself, and if someone revert, then you discuss on the talk page.

About Draven's healthcare: the size of a company doesn't matter in a biography. What matters is whether or not there's a reliable source for that. You're correct that the source given is bad, because along with being a primary source, it doesn't mention Mbondiah's name at all. Either see if there's another source that verifies this, or take it out. I'm going to take out that silly "first Zimbabwean" phrase. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (talk) 22:51, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: thanks for the balanced advice. I've been bold and removed the unreferenced award and Dravens sentence. I am quite certain it's best to focus on her achievements in Zimbabwe and philanthropy and not on her life as a UK businesswoman; explanations on talk-page, and if anyone feels strongly, they can say so. Elemimele (talk) 07:20, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Displaying a URL as plain text, not an outbound link

Hi. Is there a template for displaying a url as plain text, not hyperlinked? I need to show a URL, but in context it's better if it's not a link. Like, for example, if you wanted to say "An example of a hyperlink is https://example.com." without https://example.com turning into an outbound link to something which shouldn't actually exist. Thanks! EVhotrodder (talk) 07:14, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

https://example.com works, but it's a cheap bodge. I don't know if there's an "official" way to do it. Maproom (talk) 07:39, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

(ec) Did nowiki tag stop working?! I don't think so.... Look: https://example.com :) --CiaPan (talk) 07:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

https://example.com nowiki tags work. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:44, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both very much! EVhotrodder (talk) 07:49, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Try using the WP:NOWIKI syntax like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page. If you drop the <code></code> syntax, the link will appear unhighlighted as reagular text like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page. The <pre></pre> syntax might work as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:53, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@EVhotrodder To clarify, Marchjuly used <nowiki>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page</nowiki>. ― Qwerfjkl talk 20:09, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Yep, got it. Thanks! I'd tried a few web searches, but my web-search-fu was weak, and didn't turn up nowiki. Now I know. Thanks! EVhotrodder (talk) 08:53, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Deleted page in 2014 now highly relevant

Hello. A page for actress and presenter Georgia-May Davis was deleted back in 2014 by a wiki user who is no longer using the platform. Who do I contact to revive that original page to allow me to update it with the actresses latest relevant work? Grapepinky (talk) 20:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Grapepinky According to [10], that article had no sources, so it may be just as easy to start from the beginning. WP:YFA has guidance, and make sure you have the sources demanded at WP:BASIC, otherwise an article will not be accepted. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@Grapepinky Hey, I saw from the now deleted Georgia-May Davis that User:Xoloz deleted it, but they are retired/inactive since 2014. You have two options, you could recreate the article from scratch (nothing preventing you from doing that) and or request a Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion, where an admin will email you the original content. Hope that helps and happy editing! ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both. I didn't know a new article was allowed to be made. Grapepinky (talk) 13:24, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

@Grapepinky There is something called WP:SALT but when that's not the case, recreating is fine. Things can change with time:[11] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:11, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Mordialloc Freeway

Is Mordialloc Freeway opened to traffic? Mlik point (talk) 06:51, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mlik point What exactly are you doing? Spamming question everywhere in Teahouse, pretty sure this could ask together in the question above. In addition, please refrain from asking the same question over and over again when it has already been answered such as with your multiple questions on AUshield, if you are still unsure from the answer given, you can just reply to the same thread you have started instead of starting another new thread. Thanks you for your cooperation. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:01, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I've just handed them a 48 hour block from the Teahouse. They've been provided with helpful links where they could ask locals the many questions they have, but of late, I think they're either trolling or just taking the piss. -- Longhair\^talk 07:04, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Longhair Noted, thanks you for the temporary block. User definitely needed a break. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 07:06, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Well said. -- Hoary (talk) 07:18, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Getting tired of the frequent queries and requests that other people do work of interest to Mlik point. David notMD (talk) 11:12, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

[1] Goethals & Sorenson, 2006; Sorenson, et al., 2011

[1]