In the extremes snow depth line in weatherboxes, it says that the metric unit in parentheses should be millimeters, but in the table the data gets converted to centimeters by default. How could this be fixed? [[User:Akamaikai|Akamaikai]] ([[User talk:Akamaikai|talk]]) 18:58, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
In the extremes snow depth line in weatherboxes, it says that the metric unit in parentheses should be millimeters, but in the table the data gets converted to centimeters by default. How could this be fixed? [[User:Akamaikai|Akamaikai]] ([[User talk:Akamaikai|talk]]) 18:58, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
== znbc slod d oit hif los g md uf li m,v b lsof fu dlov v msfsyd m iv dlob um lod uvm do l o ti u is u ==
znbc lsgu o ti ti tls to ut n lso losvslo m
us lso i slov mb h ir yt sl o vm d my [[Special:Contributions/102.186.171.57|102.186.171.57]] ([[User talk:102.186.171.57|talk]]) 19:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Why does sexualised content get a platform here, yet so many worthy articles get rejected? What sort of precedence are you setting for our future selves? Do you understand the danger involved in the normalisation of degrading sexual content online? Get rid of it all NOW 2A00:23C6:B582:8501:A1DB:1DF6:6E49:BABC (talk) 11:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome. Wikipedia is not censored for any reason, as this is a project to write an encyclopedia of human knowledge. If certain content offends you, you shouldn't look at it. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, if you had named the article in question we could have checked it for vandalism. (Edit: I'm assuming Belle Delphine is the article in question.)- X201 (talk) 11:50, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Personal attacks, like calling me scum, are not permitted. I can't speak to specific content that I am not aware of, you made a general statement. 331dot (talk) 11:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Starting an Articles for deletion is a valid path to have an article deleted. Calling for an article to be deleted on the Talk page of the article accomplishes nothing. David notMD (talk) 14:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't like what you see, don't visit the article. If you are curious about something though, you can visit another website if you wish not to see anything distrubing or learn how to hide certain images. Anything on Wikipedia is fair game and legal. Cwater1 (talk) 20:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, if you didn't like what the person had to say, why did you read it? Herostratus (talk) 01:20, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
wikipedia is a place for human knowledge, no matter how degrading or inappropriate you think it is. if you dont like it, dont look at it. its that simple. ogusokumushitalk 2 me! 14:31, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
:: Deleting does not do any good. It will likely be reverted back. The is the door if you do not want to see something in the article. Cwater1 (talk) 17:52, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why you little scallywag. Who authorized you to make people feel unwelcome. And this is a teahouse not a dive bar. Behave yourself. Herostratus (talk) 07:04, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for talking that way. I will try to do better in the future. Cwater1 (talk) 14:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, this IS wikipedia. You don't HAVE to click on an article that may offend you? OptimizeAllTheThings (talk) 11:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You need to change three letters and remove three others to change from the "Neil Cicierega" to "Nail Cicada". If we wanted to create every redirect that is at most six letter change from the target, we would need more than 300 000 000 redirects for every page. For comparison, the number of articles in English Wikipedia is about 50 times less than that number.
The guideline to create redirects from misspellings is at WP:RTYPO. It says among other things if a single redirect contains multiple typos, it may be considered an unlikely search term and deleted. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 10:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am looking for a Wiki specialist to write / edit and publish an article on Sandton, Gauteng, South Africa and Claremont, Cape Town South Africa. DeeJooste (talk) 08:08, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are there already. I am not great with wiki, there are edits on those pages that need to be done. DeeJooste (talk) 08:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DeeJooste: OK, so probably the best way to request any fix or expansion to those articles is by submitting an appropriate request at their respective Talk: pages (see Help:Talk pages for more info) – Talk:Sandton, Talk:Sandown, Gauteng or Talk:Claremont, Cape Town. Those may be watched by editors involved in creating those articles, or just interested in the subject, so this may be a relatively fast way to reach them.
You can find some hints on requesting edits at Wikipedia:Edit requests. That is a routine designed for editors who can't or shouldn't edit Wikipedia articles themselves, anyway the hints given there may help you to prepare a good, clear request. Good luck! --CiaPan (talk) 09:11, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Talk pages of those articles get few viewers, so posting requests there is unlikely to get a fast response, or any response. David notMD (talk) 09:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Formal edit requests using the appropriate template will get attention from editors, no matter how obscure the page is. Poorly formulated edit requests may end up getting ignored. So, follow the rules, be cogent, be relevant, write clearly and neutrally, and always provide references to reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 10:02, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank for the information. DeeJooste (talk) 06:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You could also ask at WT:WikiProject South Africa, as people there are more likely to have interest and knowledge on the subject. Don't raise the same issue in two different places though: if you make a request on the article's talk page, you can put an item on the WikiProject's talk page asking people to look at that request. --ColinFine (talk) 13:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the information. :) DeeJooste (talk) 06:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can leave a comment on my talk page with content you would like to see added, along with the necessary references, and I can have a look.
Alternatively, just leave me some links and I can do the research myself, I wouldn't mind adding to these articles. Epifanove🗯️ 21:54, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for reaching out to me. Much appreciated. DeeJooste (talk) 06:35, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoary "McDo" is slang for McDonald's in the Philippines, like (inexplicably) Macca's is for Aussies.
Incidentally, I realize that Mcdo is redlinked and thus looks as if it will return no more than The page "Mcdo" does not exist. You can create a draft and submit it for review, or you may create the page "McDo" directly. However, it's instead interpreted as McDo, which redirects to McDonald's. -- Hoary (talk) 09:15, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a question about Simple English Wikipedia, then please rephrase it more lucidly and ask it there. If (or so far as) it is about this Wikipedia, then please rephrase it more lucidly and ask it here. -- Hoary (talk) 09:00, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do questions/comments/posts have to be formal?
While looking through the Teahouse, I see a lot of different writing styles from non-formal to super-formal. I have always assumed comments must be formal and grammatically correct or it will.. break a rule of some sort? I'm not sure. Cinnacat (talk) 07:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cinnacat: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no requirement that questions here have to be formal, the Teahouse hosts are generally adaptive to the situation. Generally speaking, we are also capable of interpreting what could have been meant for minor gramatical errors, though if a question is in a mayor way or totally incomprehensible we cannot answer it. 07:28, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is a relaxed and informal place, but you should always remember to ask people what their pronouns are before you start a conversation with them. It demonstrates that you care about and value them on the basis of their gender. Dinglepincter (talk) 16:40, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Dinglepincter: There is no need to ask people what their pronouns are, and I would be quite suspicious if someone wanted to value others on the basis of their gender. If this is something that people care about, they can clear that up easily by going to Preferences → User profile → Internationalisation and selecting the radio button that best fits them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:41, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cinnacat As the Teahouse is not a public-facing article but part of operations "behind the scenes" so to speak, it doesn't demand the formality an article would (although civility is expected). The variation you have noticed is largely down to individual styles and even varying moods, and perhaps also to whom a particular reply might be addressed (as some of us have been here for years and have got to know each others' on-Wiki personalities). I myself tend to write rather formally, simply because when I'm writing (as opposed to speaking) it's how I think – I can write more informally, or adopt various other stylistic characteristics if they're required (I used to write non-fiction copy professionally) but it takes conscious effort. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.55.125 (talk) 05:18, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Creating page
I want to create a page for my teacher, kindly provide a benchmark to help me get started. Hafiz AALC (talk) 09:59, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hafiz AALC Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We don't have "pages" here, we have articles. Writing a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia. We usually recommend that you first spend much time editing existing articles, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. It's also a good idea to use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia.
It's nice that you want to write about your teacher, but Wikipedia is not a place where people can be included just because they exist; there is criteria for inclusion, which we call notability, such as our special definition of a notable person. A person merits a Wikipedia article if they receive sigificant coverage in independent reliable sources, showing how they meet that definition. If you have at least three independent reliable sources that discuss the sigificance or importance of your teacher, you should read Your First Article and use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by independent editors. What sources do you have? 331dot (talk) 10:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You, for this humble piece of advice, i have the independent reliable sources and he can qualify the definition of notability as well. Hafiz AALC (talk) 10:28, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What sources do you have? (Three is sufficient) 331dot (talk) 10:53, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
userpage
Hi, this might be very odd to ask but can you people ping me here if your user page on Wikipedia is impressive. I would like to develop my user page too by taking some insights from fellow users/contributors. Thank you. 456legend(talk) 10:09, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
456legend "Impressive" is a matter of opinion, is there certain criteria you are looking for? 331dot (talk) 10:12, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@331dot Oh yes you are right. I am just looking for any template or something that helps me to be precise in what I contribute on Wikipedia instead of writing it on my own. 456legend(talk) 10:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
456legend, I am not Epicgenius. Indeed, I am nothing like Epicgenius. But it's a fine user page, particularly because it invites the curious reader to the subpage User:Epicgenius/Quality article contributions, which shows that Epicgenius contributes enormously to the creation of an encyclopedia. -- Hoary (talk) 12:15, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your "List of data visualization created" is pretty but not useful, as neither the map images nor the map titles link to the article in question. Plus, one has to scroll to the right to see all - not an obvious action. Consider instead having a list with no images that for each entry states Election results map at [[ ]]. David notMD (talk) 12:35, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Eh? -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh got it thank you. 456legend(talk) 13:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@456legend You might want to look at WP:UBX for ideas but bear in mind that you will contribute to the Project much more by editing in article space than on your User Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:44, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael D. Turnbull Yes I agree and assure you on this that I will contribute more on the Wikipedia main space articles. I just wanted to arrange my userspace in a organised manner. Thank you very much for the guidance. 456legend(talk) 13:13, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not on your user page, this was deleted. Your draft can be edited here Draft:Rezaul Islam Shamim it has zero sources, so please do not submit for review yet. Theroadislong (talk) 12:26, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RezaulIslamShamim Newcomers are advised to use the WP:AfC process (click link for instructions), perhaps after reading WP:YFA and WP:BACKWARD, assuming you want to work on another new article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:30, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict) A Sandbox is what is done before converting it to a draft and then submitting. This is already a draft. What you could do in your Sandbox is work on properly formatting references, which you can then paste into the draft. If you have another topic in mind, use WP:YFA to create another draft. The point about WP:BACKWARD is that it is better to start with collecting references and then creating the draft. Otherwise, ESPECIALLY FOR AUTOBIOGRAPHIES, a lot of content is added based on what a person knows to be true about themself, but cannot be verified by a ref. David notMD (talk) 12:42, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That means I need to use enough references to publish my article. RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 12:45, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See List of Bangladeshi poets for examples of dozens of articles about Bangladeshi poets. Within that list, on the article Talk pages, articles rated C-class or B-class are of higher quality than Stubs and Starts. David notMD (talk) 12:54, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I want to create an article like this. Can you help me create such an article? RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 12:58, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I edited your draft to be in compliance with Wikipedia format, but in general, Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not be coauthors. Your next big step is to find references for what people have written about you and your work, for references. You already have quotes from people about your poetry books - each of those must become referenced. See Help:Referencing for beginners on how to format references. Refs do not have to be in English. David notMD (talk) 13:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can I add all of my references in sandbox, sir. RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 13:31, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete what is in your Sandbox now (old version of the draft) and use that space to practice creating refs before copying each ref into the appropriate place in the draft. David notMD (talk) 14:43, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I already add ten plus reference in draft box, please see my draft . After see, please give me suggestion ,next step what i do ? RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 15:21, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are paragraphs without references. Any quotations by book reviewers need to be either referenced or deleted. David notMD (talk) 21:29, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have added numerous references and tried to add references in every paragraph. Please check my draft and inform me- Please confirm that the references I have used are sufficient to publish this article. RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 06:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RezaulIslamShamim: You are doing a good job adding references, but there are unsubstantiated claims in there. I have not examined all of the sources because they are not in English and it takes some steps to get them translated, but some of the sources seem to be low quality or editorial/opinion pieces; please see Wikipedia:Golden rule to learn what is expected.
The tone is also not neutral. While the section on criticism seems like an attempt at balance, overall the draft appears as if it was written to praise the subject rather than write neutrally. This is why autobiographies are discouraged; it is hard to write in a neutral fashion when you are the subject. Adjectives such as "famous" writer and "leading" university/critic/playwright are nothing more than unsubstantiated puffery violating the WP:NPOV policy. Describing the style of poetry seems also to be unsubstantiated and unreferenced; subjective opinion is stated as fact in Wikipedia's narrative voice without attributing that opinion to a source. The article would never be approved for publication in its present state. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:54, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you edited my article for approved it. Please help me for published this article. RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 07:56, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lots of reference added . Please check my draft and give me suggestion how i can published. RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 21:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Already I created an Article in Draft Box . Please review it and give me suggestion how i can improved it or published? RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 12:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@PersonalNarwhal74 Hello, welcome to the teahouse, for calculating something, please use calculator. Lemonaka (talk) 15:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not really a necessary question but the answer is 2.Cwater1 (talk) 14:40, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How to wrap the Find sources template into the Talk header box?
For example on this Talk Page: Talk:Kevin_Noble_Maillard the text at top "Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL" isn't wrapped into the other boxes.
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The best person to improve your draft is you. If you need specific help, please ask. You will need to obtain and summarize independent reliable sources that show that this web show meets the special Wikipedia definition of notable web content; the draft does not do that currently. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 17:32, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting redirects after moving a page
Hello! I've just moved an article I originally created as a personal sub-page to the mainspace, since the subject should have fulfilled WP:GNG. However, both the original sub-page and its talk page remained as redirect, as I expected.
If needed, can I delete them by myself, or should I ask an admin to do it (I'm just an autoconfirmed user at the moment)?
No worries, good day Epifanove🗯️ 21:36, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Oltrepier: You should just add {{Db-u1}} at the top of each page. As an admin, I could just delete them now, per your implied request here, but the process is more transparent if you explicitly request deletion on the pages themselves. Deor (talk) 14:30, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Deor Oh, ok, thank you for the advice. Oltrepier (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of good sources, need advice...
How do I gather good sources on something that doesn't have much on it? There's no articles or studies done on voidpunk (the subculture). There's only Tumblr (where it was created), Reddit, and the a brief mention of it on this dating site named Taimi. Is there anything that can be done? AVoidDweller (talk) 19:34, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If there are enough sources about a topic, the quantity of sources can effectively compensate for lack of coverage in news sources or academic papers and books. This is because a lot of people wouldn’t be saying something if it wasn’t correct. Just make sure your reference list is really long and you should be fine. Dinglepincter (talk) 21:21, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ETA: voidpunk is a punk subculture that was created online on 2018 (incase this info is relevant) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AVoidDweller (talk • contribs) 19:39, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, AVoidDweller. If significant coverage of the topic in reliable, independent sources does not exist, then it is impossible to write an acceptable Wikipedia article about the topic. Cullen328 (talk) 19:43, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:42 is an essay that expands on what I have said. Cullen328 (talk) 19:47, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dinglepincter's advice is wrong. For refs, quality is much more important than quantity. A few reliable source references which have at-length content, i.e., not just mention in passing, will be sufficient. If you cannot find, may be just too soon for an article. David notMD (talk) 21:34, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If creating an article feels daunting (as it should), consider adding a referenced section at Punk ideologies. The article can be done later. David notMD (talk) 21:42, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That seems to be a wiki David. Most wikis are user-generated without strong editorial control, and so are not reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I referenced that too so I could have another source other than tumblr or reddit. Also, the reason I was creating the article was also so it was easier to find voidpunk, so more people are aware of it. Which in turn generates more sources. I dont think its too soon to have a wiki article in full honesty. Especially considering over 20,000 people identify with voidpunk. I wish it was coined on a platform that was considered a reliable source, but it wasn't, it was created on Tumblr.
Is there a way to create another reliable source appropriate for the wiki? What can I do and where can I go for something like this? AVoidDweller (talk) 02:02, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ice cubes
why is store bought ice cubes clear , but house refrigerators ice cubes
are cloudy ? 2601:83:8102:FFC0:E8AD:FC1:4222:B8D6 (talk) 23:29, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to a page about the use of Wikipedia. Your question about ice cubes isn't a question about Wikipedia; it's frequently asked, and its answer is easy to find if you use Google or similar. -- Hoary (talk) 01:22, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to request removal/replacement of the name of a band member from a Wikipedia page of a music group, who is no longer using that name for privacy reasons and also attempts have been made to make all mentions of it removed from the internet. There are no proper citations for it, but currently the info is available in an archived version and the page is using this version as a citation.The said person has a pseudo name that he is using. I also don't want this info to be public. What would be the proper way to request this? I would be requesting this on the person's behalf, so these are his wishes. Brotherlouie1 (talk) 04:32, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You will need to discuss this on the articles talk page here Talk:The Red Paintings where there is already a considerable amount of back and forth. Theroadislong (talk) 08:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is my understanding that you can ask Wikimedia Foundation to remove certain information that is private (i.s. D.O,B or other private information) which are not publicly available for privacy reason. I just do not know how this is done. So I am asking for instructions. The Talk page is not the best place, because there is a troll that has been arguing against it and his arguments are based on non-existent citations. He is saying that citations existed before. Is there an admin that can review this kind of thing? Brotherlouie1 (talk) 09:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Brotherlouie1, don’t accuse other editors of being "trolls" using "arguments based on non-existent citations". Give names and diffs of the behavior on the proper venue (WP:ANI possibly), or avoid the insinuations altogether.
With that out of the way, you are probably confused about the way things work. The Wikimedia Foundation pays the bills and hosts the servers, but they intervene exceedingly rarely in the content of the encyclopedia - don’t bother asking them unless you have started legal proceedings.
The thing you want to ask is revision deletion. This can be done by administrators, but pay attention that those are just fellow editors; they have more technical abilities, but no additional weight in editorial matters. If there is significant back-and-forth at the talk page (and to be honest I did not read it all), a cold-headed admin is unlikely to just grant revdel (an exceptional measure) without a strong reason. (If one admin refuses to revdel, do not go ask another one.) TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 17:59, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Copy and Pasting Text from Website and Annual/Audit Reports of a charity
I saw a page of a charity I support on Wikipedia (Human Relief Foundation) and saw it had limited information on it. So, I added a section on Vision and Mission Statement from information available on its website and annual report submitted on the charity commission website. However, Wikipedia deleted it citing copyright issues. Question is: You can't rewrite an organization's vision/mission statements, you lose the essence. What should be the solution to this, please share your feedback. Thank you all! Reunderstandinghistory (talk) 06:44, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can add it as a quotation with attribution, but generally including a mission statement comes across as promotional. It is better to state in neutral prose what the organization actually does regardless of what the mission statement says. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that's a better idea. Thank you so much for your advice, it will help me to improve my contributions. Reunderstandinghistory (talk) 07:22, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Reunderstandinghistory: Welcome to the Teahouse. The encyclopedia primarily focuses on secondary, independent sources. While primary sourced-information can be used in some cases, taking it verbatim from a site runs afoul of copyright violations, unless the site uses an appropriate licence. The addition of such information can also come off as promotional, which is not what the encyclopedia is for. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:00, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think I will follow the advice given here by you two. Rather than copying and pasting texts, I would focus on rewriting to explain the work in own words and then cite references to back the statements. However, I still believe there should be some room in Wikipedia to mention texts such as vision and mission statements verbatim and should not classify doing this as 'promotional'. Reunderstandinghistory (talk) 07:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ReunderstandinghistorySome, but: The WP-philosophy is that any article about an organization you find here should, almost exclusively, be a summary of what WP:RS, independent of the org, has said about it. SomeWP:ABOUTSELF (see also MOS:QUOTE) can be appropriate, but afaict you added a somewhat large block of it to a rather short article, which is a WP:ABOUTSELF problem. The org:s website is usually found under "External links", and what the org wants to say about itself can be found there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, how can I make an article?
I create the page in the help page, but it is locked, what should I do? Mohammad.Hosein.J.Shia (talk) 11:16, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The first thing you should do, Mohammad.Hosein.J.Shia, is familiarize yourself with existing articles in the subject areas that interest you. First, look at the good ones. For maths, try some of these. Then look at the poorer articles in your subject areas (that's most of them). Choose one that needs improvement, and improve it. After a couple of months of this kind of work, consider creating an article afresh. -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Everybody suggests this but I feel like it can be disheartening for some new users. Wikipedia:Be bold, if they came to create an article, then why not? They can look at examples and read some policies, they don't necessarily need a couple months of small edits. Epifanove🗯️ 12:58, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Writing an article without knowing that WP:N, WP:CITE etc is mandatory and then having it deleted, is also disheartening. And time consuming for more than one. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:16, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sure it is, which is why you read some examples and consult the policies. This doesn't mean that one should spend months doing other things that one may not like to do. P.S. not trying to start a debate or anything, I just think one should be bold. Epifanove🗯️ 13:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They can be bold, but more often than not their work isn't up to standard, which leads to deletions, draftification, or drafts being declined. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:00, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, if someone isn't able to figure out how to create an article on their own, it is likely that their first attempt at writing it won't be great, and the advice given by Hoary is therefore relevant. Epifanove🗯️ 17:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ergo, the advice that the editors here are giving. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How do you order languages in infobox film and in filmography tables (when films are multi-language)?
In filmography, how do you order films when two films release on the same date? DareshMohan (talk) 11:57, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For multi-language films, put the primary language first. Otherwise alphabetical arrangement would be the logical way, though this is occurrence so rare that it doesn't much matter. Shantavira|feed me 13:21, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Shantavira: In the filmography table for Sachiin J. Joshi for Veedevadu, Tamil is listed first although Telugu is the primary language (my edit was reverted). Given that we see the actors mouthing dialogues in Telugu half the time — only the shots involving Sathish (as Sathya’s friend), Kishore and Prabhu seem to be entirely in Tamil — and the two leads’ voices are dubbed, it also gives us the feel of watching a dubbed film.1. DareshMohan (talk) 00:00, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How do I move an article from sandbox to Wikipedia?
Partha Chakraborty, this draft wobbles between referring to its subject as "he" and referring to its subject as "she". Better sort that out first. -- Hoary (talk) 13:00, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Partha Chakraborty, no you haven't. The draft still can't decide whether this person is "he" or "she" (and I also notice "She's" where I'd write "her"). -- Hoary (talk) 13:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You will need to submit it for a review, I've added the information so you can do that, but if you were to do so, it would be declined, as it's not clear to me how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable singer. 331dot (talk) 13:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Twice you've used the phrase "one after another". Say how many things happened, or find words that sound less like something occurred that the Guinness Book of Records might be interested in. An artist might release five albums in seven years; they don't release one album after another. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:54, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Websites who's design resembles Wikipedia
Can anyone creating a wiki website use MediaWiki as it's engine? Oscarjohnson1981 (talk) 14:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Oscarjohnson1981 as stated at MediaWiki "MediaWiki is a free and open-source wiki software." "Besides its use on Wikimedia sites, MediaWiki has been used as a knowledge management and content management system on tens of thousands of websites, and thousands of companies, public and private, including the websites Fandom, wikiHow, and major internal installations like Intellipedia and Diplopedia." - Arjayay (talk) 14:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draft was declined and I do not agree at all
Hello, I followed another organization that is similar to my mine almost to the letter but my draft was declined almost immediately. I do not understand why especially since my draft states only facts about the organization and there is no subjective information. This is the draft: Draft:Saudi Amateur Radio SocietyHZ1SF (talk) 14:18, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
HZ1SF Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see other stuff exists; it could be that the article you used as a model was also inappropriate, and you wouldn't know this. Wikipedia is not a place for an organization to tell the world about itself. 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 the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Wikipedia does not want to know what the organization says about itself, or just facts- we want to know what others choose to say about the organization and why it is important, influential, or significant. Please read Your First Article.
If you want to use other articles as a model, use those classified as good articles, which have been evaluated by the community. 331dot (talk) 14:23, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @331dot, I now have a better understanding of why the article was declined. What options are there for the organization if nobody else writes about it? HZ1SF (talk) 14:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
HZ1SF The best indicator that an organization meets the defintion of a notable organization is when an independent editor wholly unconnected with the organization takes note of coverage of the organization in independent reliable sources and decides on their own to write about it. Wikipedia is not a directory where every organization can have an article just because it exists. My advice is to abandon attempting to create an article about your organization and go on with the work you do; if the news or other reliable sources take note on their own of what you do, they will write about you. If they write about you, readers will see those writings and perhaps decide to write about the organization. Trying to force the issue yourself(as an organization) is not usually successful.
You've already declared your conflict of interest, so you may continue to work on a draft if you wish, but you will need to basically start over and only write based on the content of independent reliable sources- setting aside everything you know about your organization and all materials its puts out. That's usually very hard for people in your position to do- I have rarely seen people do that successfully in my years here. If there are not independent reliable sources with significant coverage of your organization, it won't merit an article at this time no matter how well you write it, and it would just use up your time. 331dot (talk) 15:21, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Dodger67, I'm new to the Wikipedia contribution thing so hopefully I'll find some help there! HZ1SF (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@HZ1SF One more point: a list of founder's names doesn't tell a reader much, if anything, about what the group does, or why the group is notable. Those names won't mean anything to anyone except the members themselves, and they are not the audience that a Wikipedia article should be written for. Good luck. David10244 (talk) 07:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @David10244, it's much clearer to me now. HZ1SF (talk) 08:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reference moves location on a web page
Say a reference used in an article still exists, but the path to that reference in the webpage it belongs to has changed (for example, moving from "www.example.com/blog/title-of-article" to "www.example.com/title-of-article"). Would one leave the reference as it is or update it? Liassica (talk) 15:56, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Liassica Updating broken reference links is a good thing, just make sure it really is the same content. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, the link I'm looking at is exactly the same as the example I gave, the site just restructured where it's articles go. Checking archive.org the articles are exactly the same, minus an inconsequential picture. Liassica (talk) 17:01, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you're checking archive.org anyway, Liassica, it would be worth adding an archive-url parameter to the citation (assuming it uses one of the "cite" templates, and hasn't already got an archive url). That will have no effect now, but may be helpful later if the site disappears. ColinFine (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
IPs and notifications
I was wondering whether IPs, i.e. unregistered users, receive notifications similar to registered users when receiving new talk page messages or having edits reverted. Going through the trouble of leaving warning messages seems kind of pointless if they don't. Help:Notifications only says mentioning them doesn't work, which I'm aware of, but doesn't say anything about other types of notifications. If they do receive alerts/notifications, what does it look like to them (since they don't have a bell icon)? Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 17:38, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good question. You could have a test with your friend, ask them log out and you gave them a warn, but take care of privacy. IMO, they cannot get warns in fact. Lemonaka (talk) 19:52, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've considered that, but being that IPs reveal personal info, I'd never ask anyone I know to do that. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 20:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Throast: The only type of notification IP's get]] - sometimes is the "You've got new messages on your talkpage" notification - delivered via a giant orange bar below the page header. Also, if an IP adress is shared bewtween multiple people, notifications might not hit the intended recipient. Victor Schmidt (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good idea to make full use of edit-summaries (as well as talk-pages) because it's just possible they'll be aware of history pages even if they haven't found, or don't use, talk pages. They might be curious about who's reverting them, which gives you another place to try to explain why! Elemimele (talk) 22:29, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
question about correction (Adam Schiff)
I have a question about how to deal with a politician that has said two conflicting statement to the press (only discovered years after it has been on Wikipedia). This is for Rep. Adam Schiff's page.
This is what the Wiki article stated before I made any edits: He graduated from Monte Vista High School in Danville, California, in 1978, and was both his class valedictorian and the student his peers voted "most likely to succeed".
The "valedictorian" claim came from a 2020 Los Angeles Times profile piece (cited). I've noticed a lot of outlets use this fact since then. However, an Oct. 2022 article shows that the previous information in the article and on Wikipedia has been wrong for at least 3 years--that he was actually never valedictorian. And so I include a brief explanation for clarity:
In 2020, Dan Schiff, the older brother of Adam Schiff, told The Los Angeles Times that Adam Schiff was Monte Vista High School's 1978 class valedictorian. However, in 2022 Schiff walked back this claim in an interview with Monte Vista High School's student newspaper The Stampede, saying "I don’t know whether it’s from Wikipedia or somewhere else, but I was not [valedictorian]". At the time, Wikipedia cited the TheLos Angeles Times story in support of the claim that he was valedictorian.
However, another user quickly did not like what I added, and wrote "Jesus Christ, he was the Salutatorian. Why not just say that instead of including an inane paragraph about "walking back" claims?"
The last edit I made was too remove the LA Times citation to this sentence as it included the inaccurate claim.
Are you able to advise on whether or not my clarification was necessary? Is there ever a time where we add this sort of explanation? I get that "walk back" may have been to harsh. I am good with the change either way, but I did feel like what I added was helpful.
Hello, LowElectrical9168. Schiff's brother and the LA Times made an error, which ended up in the biography. Schiff corrected the error, and accordingly, it was right to also correct the Wikipedia biography. It is completely unnecessary to include discussion of the error in the current version of the article, and the "walk back" phrasing implies misconduct where there was none. Cullen328 (talk) 19:11, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a relatively inexperienced editor, but I like to read a lot of Teahouse posts to passively grow my understanding of how Wikipedia works. The advice I always see is that Wikipedia isn't interested in what the subjects say about themselves, it only attempts to summarize what is said independently in reliable secondary sources. When is it preferable to let information from an interview override what was previously reported, as in this case? Are there any good essays on the subject? It seems like a subjective area. HerrWaus (talk) 20:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
HerrWaus, as guidance, WP:ABOUTSELF lays out when it is appropriate to use the subject itself as a source. You could argue that Schiff's claim of him being salutatorian is an exceptional claim; therefore, it would be inappropriate to use himself as a source for this particular claim. As with almost any content, issues like these need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Generally, I'd say whenever the subject and RS disagree as was the case here, either wait for RS to independently verify the claim or leave out the information entirely. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 20:32, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice. considering there is also now doubt I am going to delete both and deem them exceptional claims. The only source for his high school years had been him.
Thanks for the feedback. I agree the walk back part was not needed now. I chose to delete both for now as exceptional claims. The more recent source is a student newspaper so i rather wait for a more reputable source to confirm. LowElectrical9168 (talk) 10:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
About five-fold expansions and DYK eligibility
Hello again!
I just wanted to ask for a clarification on five-fold expansions of an article, since it's one of the criteria needed to make a DYK nomination.
The article should get expanded five-fold within one single edit per time, right?
I don't think I understand the question. Regardless of DYK rules, you can only make one edit at a time. If you try to make more than one at the same time, you'll get an edit clash. An edit can be as small as replacing "it's" by "its", or as large as adding several new multiparagraph sections. Wikipedia:Did_you_know#DYK_rules specifies that all of the edits for a qualifying fivefold expansion must have been made within a seven-day period. Maproom (talk) 21:33, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you asking about whether the five-fold expansion should be done with only one edit, the answer is no. You just need to expand the article five-fold within one week. Carpimaps (talk) 02:00, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Maproom @Carpimaps Sorry, I didn't articulate myself that well, admittedly...
But yes, I was actually referring about the total period of time I've got to expand the article.
Thank you for your help! Oltrepier (talk) 08:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Oltrepier You don't mention which article you are intending to expand and how long you estimate it might take. If that's longer than a week, then a suitable approach would be to copy the whole of the current article into a personal sandbox (with attribution in the first edit summary) and work on it at your leisure. Then you could add your expanded version back into mainspace when it was ready and you would still have a week to tweak it there and make the nomination. This is the approach that was taken for the recent expansion of Jenin Camp by The Bestagon, which is a current DYK nomination. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:29, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm specifically referring to this article: having already made two separate edits, I think I'll be able to add the statistics table very soon, and that should complete the five-fold expansion.
However, I've had some issues with editing tables through the VisualEditor, as I mentioned here, so hopefully I can solve them in time... Oltrepier (talk) 15:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Oltrepier See WP:DYKCRIT. The "fivefold expansion" applies only to the prose part, not tables etc. The version of the article before you added to it was so short that you should be OK, I think. Good luck with the nomination. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:10, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They keep making unsourced changes to the individual's caste background. I have reverted them two times but they keep adding it back in. I do not want to break the three revert rule of Wikipedia. How should I proceed? ThethPunjabi (talk) 23:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ThethPunjabi, I've reverted the IP and left a warning message on their talk page. Consider engaging them at their talk page regarding the issue. If this proves ineffective, you may consider WIkipedia:Dispute resolution requests. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 23:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Consider using an article lock of some sort if that doesn't work ThatADHDperson (talk) 23:58, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Getting a Wikipedia page correctly indexed by Google Search
Hi! How can I get a page re-indexed so it displays the correct page title (Wētā FX) in a Google search on a mobile device? It works fine on desktop... This is the Wikipedia page in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C4%93t%C4%81_FX
On Mobile (Chrome on iPhone) Google displays our OLD brand name Weta Digital. We updated the Wikipedia page with the new name in June 2022.
Thank you @Throast - I had a good read but couldn't find any mention of why a search result on Chrome in iOS would be any different from a search result in Chrome on Windows and MacOS. And it's not a caching issue either. This happens across different devices. I guess I'll have to go back to not getting a response from Google. ;-) BluSwedeShu (talk) 00:24, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is strange indeed. It does seem like more of a Google issue rather than a Wikipedia issue. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 00:31, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It does - I was just getting close to the end of my tether. ;-) BluSwedeShu (talk) 01:29, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BluSwedeShu: On my iPhone, "Weta Digital" is the title Google gives to a link to https://www.wetafx.co.nz/, not to Wikipedia. The HTML of the page says <meta property="og:title" content="Visual Effects + | Visual Effects + | Wētā FX" />. I'm just speculating here but maybe Google thinks the repeated "Visual Effects" sounds like search engine spam and it makes them avoid the whole meta tag and pull the title from somewhere else, e.g. incoming links from other websites. I assume many of them still use the old name. Anyway, the Teahouse is for Wikipedia issues. Questions about Google with no relation to Wikipedia are better at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that insight - I will bring it up with my (hitherto) stumped website developers. BluSwedeShu (talk) 02:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BluSwedeShu See common name. "Article titles are based on how reliable English-language sources refer to the article's subject". You want the article about Weta Digital (or Weta FX) to be titled in a way that most users won't be able to type? It's a good thing that Wikipedia has redirects, or no one would be able to reach your article. David10244 (talk) 07:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BluSwedeShu changed a mention in the lead [1] but didn't make the move [2]. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The omission of the macrons (in Te Reo Maori, the language our brand name is written in, similar to the logo) changes the meaning of the word. It would be similar to omitting the umlauts in Köln (Cologne). I just tested this and searched for Köln which redirected the query to Cologne. Similarly a search for Wētā FX redirects to Weta FX. Is this what you are referring to? BluSwedeShu (talk) 02:20, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait a minute. You say ...displays our OLD brand name Weta Digital. We updated the Wikipedia page.... This "our" and "we" strongly suggests a conflict of interest. To a reasonably good approximation, you should not be editing the article. Rather you should instead be requesting edits on the article's talk page. Oh, and it is an "article" written by others about the topic, not a "page" for social-media public-relations. Please see that WP:COI page. Feline Hymnic (talk) 10:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you - I have been advised of this in a private message, have added the Paid disclosure to my user page and will not make any further edits myself. BluSwedeShu (talk) 02:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That fails MOS:TM in spectacular style. Needs moving. - X201 (talk) 19:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Throast: I got this one wrong. Sorry. I missed the explanation of the move on the talk page. Although both forms are still used, there's apparently a move in NZ English from Weta to Wētā due to it being a Māori loanword (see Wētā for the full explanation). The version with macrons is also the registered name of the company. - X201 (talk) 09:16, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Throast, I see that the articles are titled "Weta..." without the macrons. That seems like the right thing to me. Was @BluSwedeShu asking for the title to include the macrons? David10244 (talk) 09:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@David10244: The timeline is: No macrons until September 2021 when they were added after a move discussion. Yesterday I thought it was a MOS:TM issue and throast moved them back to weta (without macrons). - X201 (talk) 10:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Shells-shells, X201, I had a discussion with Skynxnex, who moved the page after the unanimous RM back in September, on my talk page. I reviewed Talk:Weta FX and didn't see discussions or RMs, so I decided to boldly move. I of course neglected to look at Talk:Weta Workshop, so I missed the RM. Sorry for the mess. Anyone feel free to move back and revert. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 10:20, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How do you add a new page
Hey I have found a idea that is not on wikipedia where can we add a new page or do I need to ask some higher up Bubless1421 (talk) 02:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article Im trying to add is about the Communist party riots in southern parts of africa in 1973 Bubless1421 (talk) 02:51, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Bubless, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. Thank you for wanting to help improve it.
No, you don't need anybody's permission to create a new encyclopaedia article, but we do have some fairly stringent policies about sourcing, tone, and neutrality, so it's hard for newcomers to write an article which will get accepted. I'd suggest that you start by adding material to the existing article South African Communist Party, and if that expands enough to be a separate article it can be split off. But make sure you understand Wikipedia's requirements for verifiability and neutral tone: a Wikipedia article summarizes what reliably published sources say about a subject, not what you (or I, or anybody else on the internet) think or know about it. ColinFine (talk) 13:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bubless1421 For create an article, have a try on WP:AFC, but you are a very new comer, so I advise you read WP:FIRSTLemonaka (talk) 03:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Semi - protected
hello , when ever i try to open anything or try to practise editing , page is currently semi-protected , or they ask me to log in when i am already logged in , what shall i do Jaber .w (talk) 05:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Go to the article in questions talk page, explain the edit you want made to the protected article, and ask if other editors agree with the edit and will make the changes requested. Or edit on articles that are not semi-protected. Heiro 05:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jaber .w: To request an edit to a semi-protected page, use the {{edit semi-protected}} template and so it will be visable to volunteers who look at those requests. RudolfRed (talk) 17:15, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Creation of Article
I have submitted a article for creation nearly a year ago. The article has been declined for notability issues. The subject (Kandiid App) has been featured in Forbes and other tech magazines. Can you please advise?
Curtmarsalis, I quote: "Submission rejected on 17 January 2023 by S0091 (talk)." So not just declined but rejected. You're also told "STOP". This means stop. If you're interested in social networking marketplace apps, how about writing up a different social networking marketplace app? -- Hoary (talk) 06:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here's Steingruber's design for ⟨W⟩.This is odd. You'd already asked S0091 about it, and S0091 had already replied. Come to think of it, my earlier suggestion about a different social networking or marketplace app wasn't so good: attempting to write about any example that doesn't already have an article can very easily look like mere promotion. A good way to avoid charges of promotion is to write about things or people from the past. Just last night I realized to my surprise that there's still no article here about Johann David Steingruber, now best known for his fanciful alphabet of architectural plans. (NB A search engine will show an array of junk sources for him. Finding good sources will take some work.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG.
Hii i have a created a wikipage and it has been suggested for deletion with reason: Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG.
i have done updations as suggested kindly suggest further in this regard
wikipage name: Deshbhakti Ke Pavan Teerth
Deshbhakti Ke Pavan Teerth
Raksha57, the "PROD" template currently on this describes the situation and gives you various options. I suspect that you haven't read the template properly. Anyway, in the article itself we read for example This travelogue describes the incidents and the facts which have occurred in history [...] in an enthralling manner. If reviews of the book by disinterested reviewers appearing in newspapers, magazines or other periodicals of some stature (not mere blurbs written for the book) have said that the reviewers were enthralled by it, then you are free to specify who these reviewers were and where they said it. Better, you're free to summarize the reasons each reviewer gave for being enthralled, and their comments on aspects of the book that failed to enthrall them. Meanwhile, please delete the current content of User:Raksha57: an improper use of a user page. -- Hoary (talk) 08:14, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Raksha57, you have said (here) that you own the copyright to the book's cover. How is it that you own this copyright? -- Hoary (talk) 08:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot, you are right, i have mentioned that i have the copyright but actually, i know the author, and i have created this webpage after discussing the same with the author. While uploading the photograph i have mentioned that i am the author. That's not correct, could i update this information now? how? Raksha57 (talk) 08:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Go to c:File:Deshbhakti Ke Pavan Teerth PBF.jpg, log in (using the same ID and password that you use here) and edit the page so that it is truthful. (NB it's not asking you for the name of the author of the book; it's asking you for the name of the author of the front cover design.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say "reviews by retailers", I said "reviews of the book by disinterested reviewers appearing in newspapers, magazines or other periodicals of some stature". Have there been such reviews? -- Hoary (talk) 12:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand how you were unable to find a page that I linked to. Anyway, I have now deleted it. -- Hoary (talk) 12:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Raksha57, what @Hoary is saying is that you need to find independent, reliable sources wholly unconnected to your friend's book. Moreover, creating an article with a conflict of interest is very difficult, and most don't get published. (read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest). Club On a Sub 20(talk) 16:28, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Error
Not strictly a question: I just erroneously edited the thread from Archive 1180. Apologies for the mistake (I didn't see the proscription beforehand). Measure once, cut twice; Measure twice, cut once. It won't happen again. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted it back to how it was after the last archiving. - X201 (talk) 10:20, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! (Apologies again for the mistake.) -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 12:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My daughter has a sign at her woodworking business: "Measure once, cut twi" David notMD (talk) 15:47, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ferrous Picrate
I've created an account because I noticed that no page exists for ferrous picrate. On the page for Picrate, several discussed salts for the base organic compound have their own hyperlinks to their own respective pages. However, ferrous picrate has no such corresponding page, and it's hyperlink is thus red. This is in spite of the fact that this particular salt has played some noteworthy part in fuel additive research in the past (though the cited source on the Picrate page is now a 404). I guess the most important question to be asking is the notability one. Could anyone advise? Drake Weidman (talk) 09:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Drake Weidman and welcome to the Teahouse! Based on that I quickly found [4][5] I think you can probably make an acceptable WP-article on this compound, but chemistry is not really my area. At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry you may be able to find editors with an interest in the subject. If you want, you can go here: Wikipedia:Drafts#Creating_and_editing_drafts create a draft and start writing, taking as much time as you need. Try to do better that Picrate btw, that one has too few inline citations. WP:TUTORIAL and MOS:CHEM may be of help to you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:13, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Drake Weidman There is already a wikidata item wikidata:Q27260596 but no article: although the compound is mentioned at picrate. I'd suggest you draft an article only if the fuel research work is extensive and in reputable journals/books that you can cite because otherwise there will be little to say beyond what's already there. The current source can't be rescued from the Wayback machine but I did find one relevant article at doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.09.007. Personally I doubt the compound is worth expanding into its own article but you may be aware of more references. Incidentally, most articles on carboxylic acids are included with their parent acid (e.g. propionate redirects to propionic acid, but we have not yet done the same for phenols, so picrate does not redirect to picric acid although the justification would be similar: see WT:WikiProject Chemicals/Archive 2020#Carboxylic acids vs carboxylate anion/estersMike Turnbull (talk) 13:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Creating a new article | Request help in improving it
Hi everyone,
My name is Aish and I had submitted a new article for creation and it got rejected. I had tried my best to be objective and provide references for all the information yet it seems to have failed the wiki policy. I really want to edit it and send it again for consideration but for that it would be great if I get some help from the editors here.
I've had a brief look, and I would make two quick suggestions:
1. Make sure that the format (categories, specifically) abide by WP:MOS. Look at examples of similar articles.
2. Avoid using any qualitative words, such as when you say "he has held many important positions".
P.S. in terms of references and content, the article looks relatively good, so you're quite close to successfully submitting it. Epifanove🗯️ 12:46, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Epifanove's statement that "you're quite close to successfully submitting [the draft]" surprises me, Aish healthcare. Draft:Basant Garg fails to show that Dr. Basant Garg satisfies WP:PERSON. -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just took a closer look at the references and Hoary seems to be right. My instinct was to assume the best and encourage. Epifanove🗯️ 13:10, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Minor note, but it was Declined (meaning review saw potential), versus Rejected (abandon all hope). David notMD (talk) 15:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that as an appointed bureaucrat rather than an elected official, he does not reach WP:PERSON. David notMD (talk) 15:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for encouragement. I had read the "notability" requirement for anyone whose wiki article we intend to create. I had read about Dr Garg when he was appointed at National Health Authority of India as the Additional CEO, which is an important position in the Indian government. I had also read the wiki page of his predecessor [Praveen Gedam| . Perhaps, I need to look for more information in terms of his work and rewrite my draft. I will try my best.
Hi, I would like to change the name of the page to أبراج الساعة instead of أبراج البيت on the Arabic version.
As for the English version we need to add 'The Clock Towers'.
Hello, Salembahamdain93, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want the English article Abraj Al-Bait, renamed, please place a request at requested moves. It will help if you can show that that is the name most used in English-language sources.
If you are in any way connected with the development, you need to be aware of the policies on editing with a conflict of interest, and if you are employed in connection with it then you must first make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor.
.... and I've added the link to the website to the building's infobox. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All edits revereted
Hello,
After having gone through the policy guidelines, I took the leap to make some minor edits to update a Wiki page. However, all the changes were reverted.
Unclear as to why exactly. Some mentions of a citation spam. However, I followed the citation format of existing citations on the page and included citations from published peer-reviewed journals.
May I please get some insight on how to figure out what went wrong?
Here is a comparison of the reverted changes.
Here is a list of my contributions which were all reverted.
Thanks in advance! Neeyoy (talk) 15:06, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Neeyoy, and welcome to the Teahouse. It doesn't look to me as if those edits are spammy (I notice that one of the authors of one of the papers is Neeratyoy Mallik, which suggests there might be a conflict of interest issue, but that's only one of them). I suggest asking MrOllie, who was the editor who reverted you, why they did so. (You could post on their user talk page, but I've pinged them, so they will probably answer here, or directly to you on your user talk page). ColinFine (talk) 15:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See also BiedenkA (talk· contribs). There is a concerted effort to add citations by these authors. MrOllie (talk) 15:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The edit here was made to understand if self-citing is strictly forbidden or there is an issue with the entry overall.
Even if I ignore this issue and look at few of the edits I made on this page, I am not sure what can be done differently and an insight would be appreciated.
As ColinFine mentions, the edits were naive and enhancing already existing information.
Also, regarding the citation that could feature under a conflict of interest issue, though I see the point, the concerned work was already mentioned in the same article with the Github page linked. I simply added the published article to as a source/citation. Neeyoy (talk) 15:32, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply @MrOllie. We are not doing a concerted effort to add citations. We are following the suggestions of the Wikipedia tutorial to start with small edits in topics which we are familiar with. In future we will refrain from adding citations to works which can cause a COI.
Still I don't fully see the need for all reversions you did. BiedenkA (talk) 15:42, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In order to facilitate a transparent discussion and for clarity, I made a minor edit reintroducing one of the citations I had added in one of the reverted edits.
Kindly don't see this as a violation but an attempt at updating the Wiki article with more recent, relevant information and in case of reversion, understand what is wrong.
Reason for this citation:
A much more recent citation than the rest which empirically verifies the text sentence in the article, introduces a new Bayesian Optimization method which is the current state-of-the-art, published in one of THE top Machine Learning peer-reviewed journals, and it is not a self-citation.
I request you to kindly engage with me here and enlighten me on what am I doing wrong here.
As a member of the research community that the concerned Wiki article refers to, the page is vastly backdated and it would be nice to know how to correctly update the information.
Or the point of Wikipedia is lost.
Thanks & Regards. Neeyoy (talk) 15:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Neeyoy I'm no expert in that topic but WP:SELFCITE specifically says that Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant, conforms to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB, and is not excessive. Wikipedia wants to encourage subject-matter experts to contribute provided they do not do so in an way that makes the article unbalanced or parts of it WP:UNDUE. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Neeyoy, Wikipedia absolutely does want input from experts, especially to help update articles.
What we'd ideally like to see is you adding sources as much as possible to other people rather than to your own work. As Mike Turnbull says, it's not forbidden to cite to yourself, and certainly if, as someone who knows the current research, you know that a paper of your own is the most appropriate source for a particular assertion or update, by all means use it. But if you're only inserting your own research, and not also inserting that of other current researchers in the field, it is likely to been seen as self-serving and will absolutely attract hostile attention from editors who suspect Wikipedia is being spammed. Valereee (talk) 18:10, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to revert your most recent edit. Adding a citation with no new information is not adding to human knowledge, it's WP:SPAM. If there are parts of your paper that you think editors should evaluate for inclusion, you can summarize the sections on the talk page using WP:EDITREQUEST with proper references to your work and supporting works. If it is WP:DUE, another editor will add it. Slywriter (talk) 03:26, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Slywriter, it's worth adding a citation with no new information if the citation is supporting uncited content already there. (I haven't checked the additions, just making sure we're all clear on this.) Valereee (talk) 14:17, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Valereee, right adding sources to unsourced is good. Adding a second source to existing sourced content without new information and a COI is bad. Slywriter (talk)
Edit-a-thon help sought
I am looking for expert to work with a colleague and I during an edit-a-thon in Iowa towards the end of March. Where can I go to find one or ask one for assistance? Thanks!! Holly sue89 (talk) 15:40, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the draft being brought to AfD and it was deleted after more users voted for it than Ones posted. Plus, admins and moderators deleted it when it has a bunch of detail and sources cited. Would you please always explain why did this draft got deleted on Wikipedia? And how though? Thanks. — 2600:1010:B1A7:5CE1:F888:A176:26F6:1B94 (talk) 16:27, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please give us a link to the draft or to the AFD. Neither Battle for BFB nor Draft:Battle for BFB appear ever to have existed. Also please note that the outcome of an AFD doesn't depend on the number of !votes but on the strength of the policy arguments. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But this article is based on a popular web series and it is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia. — 2600:1010:B1A7:5CE1:F888:A176:26F6:1B94 (talk) 16:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would say to search up on either news, blogs, social media, and journals. They have a lot of available content to source from. —2600:1010:B1A7:5CE1:F888:A176:26F6:1B94 (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So name your three best sources right here in this thread and we'll see. Blogs and social media are ruled out as not reliable. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:15, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can chose these sources, these are “Medium”, NBC, and IGN. These are those sources I choose. Why social media doesn’t establish the notability of the web series. —2600:1010:B1A7:5CE1:F888:A176:26F6:1B94 (talk) 17:31, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, this is blacklisted for good reason. We don't need more disruption around it. StarMississippi 17:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What in a good reason for a blacklist as a draft name? —2600:1010:B1A7:5CE1:F888:A176:26F6:1B94 (talk) 17:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because folks refuse to respect consensus, which you well know. Please log in and edit with your account. StarMississippi 17:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ETA, the IP is pblocked from Wikipedia space for 36 hours for the blatant disruption across here, VP and Help Desk. StarMississippi 17:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Adding slang words in articles
Hello there. The human language is aging and continues to evolve at the same time. So this means more word that are new needs to be continually be used often. I saw those slang words like “hard pass”, “on fleek”, “totes”, “vacay”, “janky”, “hundo”, “convo”, “lewk”, “covidiot”, “chuegy”, “rizz”, “adorbs”, “boujee”, “inspo”, “DM”, “unshop”, “cyberjack”, “cringe”, and “yeet.” Plus I noticed that most of the slang are rarely use in many articles. Slang teaches and guides readers of encyclopedia. So, should I added those slang words in articles in order to make the vocabulary and lexicon diverse? If not, why not? Thank you! — 2600:1010:B1A7:5CE1:F888:A176:26F6:1B94 (talk) 16:39, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say, and as such the language they use is what we use. This isn't the place to contribute to the development of the English language, by using words just because. 331dot (talk) 16:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reasons of why it isn’t a place to contribute to the development, even though when editing articles of adding content? —2600:1010:B1A7:5CE1:F888:A176:26F6:1B94 (talk) 17:10, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Buy what is the point of forbidding slang words? Are they allowed or it is a requirement? —2600:1010:B1A7:5CE1:F888:A176:26F6:1B94 (talk) 17:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is a tertiary source. Because of that, we do not prescribe language nor do we share our experiences in the articles. ✶Mitch199811✶ 18:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Individual words and their meaning can be and are included in Wiktionary, which already has an entry for covidiot for example. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:00, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I consider myself quite well-read but am older than most of the population. Of the 19 words listed in the OP, I have never heard of 15 of them. It does our readers no service to deliberately use neologisms that they may not understand. WP:TONE says that articles should not be written using argot, slang, colloquialisms, doublespeak, legalese, or jargon that is unintelligible to an average reader; it means that the English language should be used in a businesslike manner. CodeTalker (talk) 20:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And English is perhaps your first language? It's not mine, and I got even less. "Cringe" isn't slang though, is it? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:24, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's slang to say "that's cringe". The word itself isn't always slang. ("I cringed when I saw that photograph" is a perfectly standard sentence.) -- asilvering (talk) 03:27, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb23 has blocked the OP as a puppet. -- Hoary (talk) 23:13, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of an encyclopedia is to allow readers to learn about various people and other subjects, not to learn slang. David10244 (talk) 10:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, don't try to use Wikipedia as a soapbox for "evolving" the English language Club On a Sub 20(talk) 16:17, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not entirely sure editing Wojak's page to say that phenomenon is "the sans undertale of ragefaces, considered so omnipresent it kinda might be more goated with the sauce than that Gigachad Nail Cicada (Baja be his Blast), ngl" would help make it more comprehensible, honestly.
Even if slang like that was suddenly used by everyone ever, it might still vary wildly in definition from person to person, so it'd still be better to not risk using it. And then there's the issue of the however many different types of slang (like gang speak, right/left-wing gibberish, etc.) that would probably alienate anyone not familiar with all of them, and would definitely ruin the entire concept of NPOV.
It's something I think can only lead to wild outcomes, and I'd rather not have to witness the potential implosion of a site because of some forms of language almost exclusive to terminally online speech- ah, dammit, that's slang too.
Either way, it seems OP wasn't here for anything besides shitposting, so none of this was even worth thinking about in the first place. cogsan (talk) 19:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Loging into Wiki.
Years ago I contributed to the page about Styal Children's home. I lived there with my brothers and sister from the age of 3. Since that time I have been diagnosed with a brain tumour (not cancer). However because it was misdiagnosed, at first, as nothing wrong then a TIA It was allowed to grow till it affected my short term memory then my vision in the right eye. I attempted to log into the Styal page several times but can't do it. Find it hard to follow instructions even though your page isn't very difficult. Can you help me. <email redacted> 2A02:C7F:9866:EE00:88D8:4431:3D6B:A52C (talk) 16:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very sorry to hear about this, but I'm wonder what exactly it is you want to do. Did you create an account? 331dot (talk) 16:51, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Beryl. I have removed your email, as we do not usually contact people by email, and this is a very public place to display it.
We do not have the concept of "logging into a page" - we log into accounts, and there is no connection between an account and an article. I observe that the article Styal Cottage Homes was edited a couple of time by editor DMRBTutinclub in 2016? Is that your account? If you have the password recorded, then you can log into it, but if you haven't then I'm afraid you won't be able to login to the account. However, you don't need a particular account to edit most articles: you can create a new account, or edit without logging in.
However, the edits that account made in 2016 were, I'm afraid, unacceptable. It is a core policy of Wikipedia that all information be verifiable from a published source: personal recollections are never acceptable, however interesting or important they might be. You might find other places to publish them: see WP:alternative outlets. --ColinFine (talk) 17:20, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone who sees this is interested in the subject, the article has very few inline references and could use some TLC. David10244 (talk) 10:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in mind that you IP address will be shown if edit while not logged in. Making a new account is fine if you don't remeber the password for the old account and your email at the time is no longer reachable. In some cases, it is not sock puppetry. Cwater1 (talk) 15:24, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Translation
Hi, I want to know when can I remove a translated expand article maintenance tag from a translated article. For example look into this article Oh Se-hoon, now what am I supposed to address and how to resolve this maintenance tag. 456legend(talk) 19:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
456legend, there is no hard-and-fast rule. The tag was probably placed because the corresponding article in Korean is more comprehensive than the one in English. It is simply a suggestion to expand the article. If you choose to expand the article by translating text from the Korean article, make sure to follow the steps laid out on the tag. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 21:53, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can remove such tags any time - we have rather too many of them in obvious cases like this. Anyone who can read Korean will know the other article is likely to be much longer. The tag has been there for over 10 years .... Johnbod (talk) 22:03, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can I use a source with a different language from the article I'm writing?
I'm trying to write my first article from scratch and I was searching for sources. So I wondered if I can use a Dutch source for my English article? MyranvanEverdingen2003 (talk) 20:04, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I've edited Barbar Bosson's page to noted her recent passing, can't find anything on google and I suppose this would be the next place where people would check - is it possible / worth adding a death where no "official" notice has been give, other than via son on his social media? JonnyTout (talk) 21:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
JonnyTout Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Is there going to be a news story or even a published obituary in a newspaper/media outlet? That would be better than a social media post. 331dot (talk) 21:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, not sure as yet there's nothing on google, so I'll probably wait until there is. JonnyTout (talk) 22:11, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@JonnyTout: In case you haven't seen it, someone added an article from Variety magazine to the Barbara Bosson article. GoingBatty (talk) 16:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How can I help?
Howdy, I am a brand new editor looking for ways to improve/help Wikipedia. I’ve read about and want to be involved with anti-vandalims and new page reviewing here. Can you show me some tools to help me do this, advice on what/how to do, pages/guidelines to read, and your own tips for Wikipedia. I honestly had no idea that everyone can edit!! Illusion Flame (talk) 21:50, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome Illusion Flame! While I did not start with the same goals (wanting to expand pages more than doing maintenance), I found myself a niche or project for me to work on.
If you want to be a new page patroller, you should obtain at least 500 edits to articles and been registered for 3 months. ✶Mitch199811✶ 22:01, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think joining a Wikiproject is a good way to start. You might also find a maintenance category to adopt - lots of stuff at WP:MAINT. CAT:UP is probably a good one. I patrolled when I was starting out, but it looks like that one's clear right now. Eventually you'll run into a topic you enjoy and stick there. -- asilvering (talk) 03:24, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. Does anyone else with experience in maintenance like tasks have any answers to “Can you show me some tools to help me do this, advice on what/how to do, pages/guidelines to read, and your own tips for Wikipedia?” — Preceding unsigned comment added by Illusion Flame (talk • contribs) 22:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I review new pages, even though I am not NPP. I do have a high error rate, and I suspect yours will be even higher. I recommend accumulating a few edits/days until autoconfirmed, enabling twinkle, and patrolling Special:RecentChanges, using filters such as "#Possible vandalism" or "May be bad faith". If the contribution is very, very harmful to the encyclopedia, such as shouting, promo, or egregious original research, then it is suitable for an instant revert.
Usually a vandalism revert (with Twinkle) looks like this:
Click on the 'diff' link
Press 'vandalism' or 'rollback' or 'rollback (AGF)' on Twinkle
Enter edit summary/confirm revert
Leave a template warning on the vandal's talk page using TW -> Warn -> select template
Might be overly technical, but this is a good starting point. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, sounds good. I will start patrolling recent changes and using the twinkle once I have some edits/time here. Thank you for the quick reply and answering my question. Another question: How do you add the name thing next to the end of your statements? A bot did it for me last time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Illusion Flame (talk • contribs) 23:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Illusion Flame, you hit the tilde or "swung dash", "~", four times in a row: "~~~~". -- Hoary (talk) 23:28, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The list of things to do in Wikipedia seems endless, Illusion Flame. I've just arrived at a gushing advertisement for a company named Harold Radford. Somebody with time and energy could beneficially drain the gush out of it. (And there are six references within it to "Harold Radford Limited, The Tatler, 10 June 1953", which I'd guess is merely an ad by the company in this seventy-year-old issue of the magazine.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I took a look at this article and... yikes. I've done edits in the past working to remove bias from advertisement-y articles (although I've been editing wiki articles for just a little less than a year, so I am definitely not an expert). But I'll see if there's anything I can do to make this page less biased. A. E. Katz (talk) 04:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sungodtemple (That’s how you pinged me, so I hope this pings you) I will start learning by doing, not waiting to learn every rule first. (Which I quickly found impossible) I patrolled the recent changes and undid 2 edits I thought were bad. I warned the user too. Can you check my undo and warning and see if I did it right, and give me feedback on what to change to make things easier or correct. Illusion Flame (talk) 00:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Illusion Flame, the reverts you made look good to me. Unless you can write up a good warning message yourself (with links to relevant policies etc.), make sure to use Twinkle. You can also use {{uw-vandalism1}} in cases of talk page vandalism. Furthermore, make sure to use indentation. For example, if you were to respond to my message here, you would use two colons ("::") at the beginning of your response. This makes discussion threads much easier to follow. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 13:08, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks y’all for your help. I am going to start doing a lot of antivandalism/maintenance work now and once I become more qualified, be a new page patroller. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Illusion Flame (talk • contribs) 11:45, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Correct process when it's not clear what to do (XPostFacto)
I've had a look at the XPostFacto article. It's linked to by a lot of macOS version pages for releases prior to Tiger (2005), to mention how it can be used to install those releases on older PowerPC Macs. However the page is fairly low quality, it has a couple of notices, no infobox and no references. It would appear on the face of it to be a nice article to try and clean up, however I do wonder if it's notable enough to spend time on; I seem to remember a couple of WP: policies about how Wikipedia is not a tech support database or tutorial and worry that it might get deleted anyway. As well, I'm not sure what the best way to try and get other editors opinions on it; I don't know if talk pages for low-trafficked pages get any eyeballs on them, I'm not sure about the other methods for asking around, WP:RFC said it was probably too heavyweight a process if there was no particular dispute on the page, and I'm pretty sure I should involve WP:WikiProject Computing somehow. Thanks in advance for any help! Small and useless donkey (talk) 22:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Small and useless donkey, a better place to ask would be WT:WikiProject Computing, and a good way to ask there would be to provide links to three of the best reliable sources that you can easily find for the subject and ask whether these three seem to add up to "notability", as defined by Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 23:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article averages fewer than 10 views per day, which is another factor in deciding to put in a lot of effort on a deeply flawed article. David notMD (talk) 12:43, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is this actually notable?
So I play a game called Juke's Towers of Hell on Roblox and I know a lot about it. I play it every day and want to see if people are interested in the game after reading the article but there is 1 question I would like to ask: Is Juke's Towers of Hell worth putting on Wikipedia? I just want to get this cleared up. Yeet 13la (talk) 23:15, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeet 13la, please provide links to three of the best reliable sources that you can easily find for "Juke's Towers of Hell", and then somebody here who knows more about games than I do will probably be able to answer your question. -- Hoary (talk) 23:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Yeet 13la I did a cursory search on the internet and could not find any good sources for establishing notability. For a subject to be notable enough to be made into an article, it needs to have multiple reliable and independent subject with significant coverage(i.e. not one sentence). For more information, see the General notability guideline. The best source I found is a TVtropes article, but it is an open wiki without editorial control on quality, so editors in the past decided that it was unreliable. (Try searching up "Tropes" on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources) Carpimaps (talk) 23:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are a notable person's non-notable children and relatives notable enough to merit mention in a biographical article?
More to the point, are there any Wikipedia guidelines that cover this issue? Sometimes biographical articles keep such mentions brief and just mention the number of children the subject may have had. Other time they will list out full names of children, grandchildren, and other relatives in spite of their lack of notability. I'd be thankful for guidance. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 01:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, welcome to the teahouse. Most of time, just keep the numbers of children and grandchildren is better, especially they are not notable. WP:BLP#People who are relatively unknown is for that Lemonaka (talk) 01:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Red links
Where can I find red links? 2001:4455:638:5400:C119:A81A:8D52:3628 (talk) 04:28, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's one to your Talk page right here, and some more for other editors' userpages on this page. Can you be more specific about what kinds of redlinks you're trying to find, and why? Some Wikiprojects maintain redlink lists of topics they plan to write articles for, is that what you're after? -- asilvering (talk) 04:48, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I want it so I can make articles
And maybe help people — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaizeninReignsapark (talk • contribs) 05:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MaizeninReignsapark: See Special:WantedPages for a list. There are also some links on the top of that page to other lists. If you are a new user, the usual advice is to work on improving existing articles before trying to create a new article, since it is not an easy task for new users. RudolfRed (talk) 05:19, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
New Article
I created a new article 4 days ago in my draft. Please help how can I published this draft. RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 04:38, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right now you haven't submitted it for review - you have to click on that big blue button! -- asilvering (talk) 04:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Have you read my article? If you have read then please confirm me if my writing is correct in Wikipedia style. RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 04:54, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is not, no. You need sources for the claims in this article, and you need to ensure it is written neutrally - see WP:NPOV. -- asilvering (talk) 04:58, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I try my best to write neutrally. Please write it and give me suggestion how can I improve my article? RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 05:01, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I second Asilvering's comment. Sample: Through his work as an editor, Reza has demonstrated a keen eye for talent and a dedication to sharing the works of writers who may not otherwise have had the opportunity to reach a wider audience. These efforts have helped to promote a diverse and vibrant literary culture, both in Bangladesh and beyond. Either (A) prove this, by citing reliable sources (whose content mustn't merely be compatible with this but must instead say it), or (B) cut it. Additionally, if people (etc) are famous (or renowned or similar), then there's no need to say that they're famous; and if they aren't, then of course saying that they are is a falsehood. -- Hoary (talk) 05:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oky edited this paragraph. I requested sir please help me ? RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 05:27, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In a particular poem/book: Reza refuses to acknowledge geographical boundaries and instead portrays the consumerist image of people. This book presents the evolution of modern civilization in a historic-poetic manner, creating a sense of dismay about the world of rulers. Either (A) prove this, by citing reliable sources (whose content mustn't merely be compatible with this but must instead say it), or (B) cut it. Et cetera. Spend at least one week going through this draft, systematically and ruthlessly. -- Hoary (talk) 05:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I edited this one. I'm new to Wikipedia so I can't catch my mistakes.
What do you mean "edited this one"? The comment was about the entire draft, not just one paragraph.You really need to go over this yourself. I left a comment on your talk page that you haven't addressed by editing the article. There is much unsubstantiated puffery in the article. You have not fully addressed the comments above. It is not written neutrally, it is written to praise the subject. Go through it and find every adjective, and eliminate the ones that aren't substantiated by reliable sources that are independent of the subject. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given that this is about you, remove ALL content that you know or believe to be true that is not verified by independent references. Submit it only after that task is completed. Autobiographies often fail to be accepted because the creators cannot bear to leave out saying wonderful things about themselves. David notMD (talk) 12:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you give me any advice on how I can upload this biography to Wikipedia? RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 13:19, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You need to submit your autobiography for review by clicking the "submit for review" button. Theroadislong (talk) 13:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please give me this much assurance whether the article I have written is likely to be uploaded. Then I click Submit for review.
That is what the review process is for. Theroadislong (talk) 13:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That means you are advising me to click on the review RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 13:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly I tried my best to write an unbiased article but I'm still new so I don't know how to write articles in Wikipedia style yet if you can help me by editing my article I will be very much appreciated RezaulIslamShamim (talk) 14:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would address all the issues in the comments first. 13:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not coauthor. You have received lots of advice here, also Comments at the draft, some of which you have ignored. The burden is on you to decide if the draft is ready to be reviewed. Often, and especially often for attempts at autobiography, drafts are Declined. The declining reviewer will identify some - but not necessarily all - of reasons for the decision. Creating editors are expected to address all shortfalls before resubmitting. Each time a draft is submitted, there is a waiting period of as short as days but sadly as long as months before it is reviewed. The wait tends to be longer if most/all of the refs are not in English. David notMD (talk) 16:01, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
David notMD This is further complicated by the user's admission on his talk page that he is not actually RezaulIslamShamim but has set up an acoount under that name. Theroadislong (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Now blocked for that, plus other reasons. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:21, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OY veh. If you are not RIS (I am surprised) then as part of your unblock request you must follow procedure for changing User name. David notMD (talk) 22:15, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Under poetry, the sentence "Through these books, Reza demonstrates his depth of intellect and versatility in tackling contemporary issues in his writing." Can you cite who wrote this? Or is this just you, saying a nice thing about you?? David notMD (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia Draft Page
I created a new page but it is showing as a draft, how can I make this page visible to everyone? Denizaltunel (talk) 05:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Denizaltunel. If you're asking about Draft:Mizu, then I don't think that draft is ready to upgraded to article status just yet. It's not something that's seems to be in danger of being speedily deleted, but it's also not something that clearly meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If you tried to it to the article namespace right now, I've got a feel that it would either be (1) returned to the draft status or (2) nonminated for deletion fairly soon. You're going to need to find some much stronger significant coverage in multiple reliable sources for this draft to have any chance of surviving as an article. There's no deadline when it comes to working on drafts so perhaps continue looking for better sources. Then, when you think it's ready for article status, you can submit it to WP:AFC for review.Finally, are you connected to Mizu in anyway? If you're connected to the company in some way, you might also want to take a careful look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for reference since it may apply to your situation. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Denizaltunel, welcome to the teahouse. Draft can become article through the process of WP:AFC, if you submit your draft, some volunteers will review it and will give you their advice. Please be patient, it may take a lot of time to wait for reviewing. Lemonaka (talk) 10:28, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
were dose wikipedia get this infomation
dose wikipedia accualy go to these places for real life if not were do you get this information
203.221.189.166 (talk) 06:43, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@203.221.189.166 Hello, welcome to the teahouse. However, you English is a little messy and I cannot quite understand you. If you are not familiar with this language, please seek help on WP:Embassy.After reading it again, I'd like to share you with a thought that Wikipedia is based on Wikipedia:Reliable sources, we will check these articles, together with sources and cites regularly to make the article clear and accurate. Lemonaka (talk) 10:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
if you don not have the answer i don't know if it is true or not 203.221.189.166 (talk) 06:44, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Every Wikipedia article should have citations to reliable sources to show where the information comes from. You should be able to verify any statement in a Wikipedia article yourself, by looking at the cited sources. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To enlarge further on that: the citations may have a link to the source if it's actually on the internet, but this is not required; most citations merely give enough information for you to track down the source yourself, for example by going to a public library with a copy of the cited book, newspaper or journal and borrowing or reading it there, perhaps after requesting the library to obtain it by an Interlibrary loan. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.198.55.125 (talk) 08:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In short, Wikipedia is only as good as its references. The content is created by volunteers (meaning not paid editors). Other volunteers add or remove content in their efforts to make articles better. The process never stops. Think of Wikipedia as always approaching the truth. Of the millions of articles in various languages, many articles are weak or contain wrong information. Sometimes content may be true, but no editor added references, so the truth cannot be checked yet. David notMD (talk) 13:09, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Asking for help: jazz musician and poet "David Gonzalez"
I need the collaboration of some editor for the improvement of this article that is in draft format: Draft:David Gonzalez (multi-disciplinary artist). It would be great if it were an editor with musical knowledge, as this is a New York musician and poet who has collaborated with great artists. I think the article needs some distance and a neutral point of view. I appreciate the collaboration and also ask for my help for any other article. Thank you very much for your help. Miskito89 (talk) 09:48, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You article is already pretty well written, I'll see if I can help to make it even better. Alternatively, you can ask to the wikipedia reference desk [6] where you can find people that are knowledgeable on the subject. Wish you all the best. Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 09:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gonzalez put on a show. We read: It was a mesmerizing show of monologues, music, video, poetry, and sound design, narrated in English and Spanish, in which Mr. Gonzalez delivered exemplary multi-media narratives about immigrants based on their true stories. This comes with a reference. Which critic, in which newspaper, drama periodical or similar can it be, one may wonder, that calls the show mesmerizing, with exemplary narratives? Uh, well, actually no critic. Instead, the voice is that of the theater that's putting on the show, in a page advertising the show as an upcoming attraction. This draft needs a lot more work. -- Hoary (talk) 11:38, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Refs 3-8 mention him by name as working with these people, but do nothing to confirm his notability. And there are a lot of well-known organizations mentioned in the career section, but without refs. David notMD (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Request for help: Draft article of the EP by TISM: Form And Meaning Reach Ultimate Communion
I've been working on a draft for a work by the band TISM, Form And Meaning Reach Ultimate Communion, and since I'm a newer editor I'd love some help with making it better. The hunt for sources has been tough but I think I've referenced (almost) all the information in the article, currently need recommendations on what to add (new segments, such as reception?), and to rearrange the article. Commemorative1 (talk) 12:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Commemmorative1, and welcome to the Teahouse. Sorry, but, not so far. Looking at your 11 references: 5 are repeats. Please see WP:reusing references. Of the rest, one is to their own site - not independent; 1 is to Wikibin. Since Wikipedia, like most Wikis, is not regarded as a reliable source, and so should almost never be cited as a reference, wikibin - which appears to be a graveyard for material that even Wikipedia wouldn't keep - is absolutely useless as a source. Viciousthreadsttore is presumably a store selling the album, so is not independent. Discogs is not regarded as reliable - see WP:RSDISCOGS. That leaves Rolling Stone, and Beat Magazine as the only possible sources that contribute to notability. I haven't looked closely at the Rolling Stone one - the title made me think it was from a press release, and so not independent, but I'm not sure. The Beat magazine URL takes me to the magazine but not the article, so I don't know.
If those two are reliable and independent and (preferably) you can find a third one, then it may meet the requirements for notability. ColinFine (talk) 13:15, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Shouldn't be too hard to find a few more. Commemorative1 (talk) 14:06, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To clear up the record store sources, they're officially owned by DRW Entertainment, TISM's label. Still a primary source, but not a random record store. I'll be looking for more independent sources. Commemorative1 (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well done, but I fear that you have made the classic error of writing the article BACKWARD. ColinFine (talk) 17:59, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Asking for help: Where do I put this where?
Hello, I'm working on Draft:Doors (video game), and I wrote about some events in the game that happen when you are playing, however, I don't know if I should put it in Plot or Gameplay. Where do I put it? LeGoldenBoots (talk) 15:17, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have a question, is IMDb/Rotten Tomatoes a credible source? BananaBreadPie12 (talk) 18:22, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BananaBreadPie12, IMDb is an unreliable source because its content is user-generated, see WP:IMDB. Rotten Tomatoes is considered generally reliable for its review aggregation and news articles. You can check community consensus on the reliability of a number of commonly used sources at WP:RSP. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 18:42, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Thank you, if I may, can I put IMDb ratings on pages? BananaBreadPie12 (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
BananaBreadPie12, if they are reported on by reliable sources, yes. Although I'm sure many editors would take issue with that since IMDb user reviews are notoriously prone to manipulation. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 18:51, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gråbergs Gråa Sång, that's in essence what I already said. If IMDB ratings are the subject of reliable coverage, they may be included. Citing IMDb itself as a source for its ratings is not accepted. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 19:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gråbergs Gråa Sång, any reason why you are disregarding my responses? Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 19:44, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Throast, sorry if I gave you that impression. My first reply here would have been an edit conflict in the old days, there was no comment of yours to disregard when I started writing. For my second comment, despite your comment I still wanted to mention the Ghostbusters example. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
athlete wikipedia creation page
Below are details of a professional athlete without their own wikipedia page. Can someone please advise or assist in its creation.
Thanks
Hello, Haroldk12, and welcome to the Teahouse. I for one am not going to plough through a list of URLs to see which of them might contribute to notability. Which three of those, in your opinion, each satisfies the triple criteria of being a reliable source (published by somebody with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking), being wholly independent of Green (not written, commissioned, or published by Green or his associates or agents, and not based on an interview with him or a press release from his team), and containing significant coverage of him? If you can find at least three such, then he meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and an article about him is possible. ColinFine (talk) 19:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply.
Below are the most relevant links that meet the criteria. An article in the Washington Post and Major League Baseball sites. He's one of the best prospects in all of baseball and his father played a long career in the NFL.
The first one might do. The second one is from an interview with his father, and so not independent. The third one does not contain significant coverage of him. After that I lost interest in ploughing through a list of bare URLs. Please reread my previous reply. If you have three good sources, you need not waste your time and mine by putting any more here. (Keep them, because you'll want some of them to flesh out the article. But you don't need them to establish notability). ColinFine (talk) 21:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Below are three legitimate impartial articles in credible outlets discussing this future major league baseball star. Thanks for sharing any other next steps?
Extended content
Elijah Green Drafted No. 5 Overall by Nationals; Father Eric Played 10 Years in NFL
ADAM WELLS - Washington Post
JULY 17, 2022
The Washington Nationals are betting on Elijah Green as their next superstar player after selecting the IMG Academy outfielder with the fifth overall pick in the 2022 Major League Baseball draft.
In a draft class full of legacy players, including Druw Jones (son of Andruw Jones), Justin Crawford (son of Carl Crawford) and Jackson Holliday (son of Matt Holliday), Green also comes from a family of athletes. His father, Eric Green, had a 10-year NFL career as a tight end and made the Pro Bowl twice (1993, 1994).
Elijah has the frame to play football at 6'3" and 225 pounds, but he is one of the best athletes in the 2022 MLB draft class. The 18-year-old has been on the prospect radar for years, with his arrival really coming during the 2020 Area Code Games.
By Lacy Lusk on February 9, 2023
Baseball America
With his combination of power and speed, 19-year-old center fielder Elijah Green has as high of a ceiling as anyone in the Nationals' organization.
Green, the son of 10-year NFL tight end Eric Green, was the fifth pick in the 2022 draft out of IMG Academy in Bradenton, Fla. He signed for $6.5 million and then showed off his talents in the Florida Complex League.
Green hit .302/.404/.535 in 12 games, posting the highest OPS among 18-year-olds with 50 or more plate appearances.
“The skill set is pretty remarkable in itself,” Nationals farm director De Jon Watson said.
The 6-foot-3, 225-pound Green has plus power, speed and arm strength along with above-average fielding ability. In an organization with three Top 100 Prospects who can all play center field—Green, James Wood and Robert Hassell III—he might have the best chance of sticking in the middle of the field.
But there is a lot of development that must come first, particularly after he struck out 40% of the time last summer.
Green was off to a good start at the organization’s early minor league camp in West Palm Beach, where he was among 54 invitees. The workouts were similar to those that would have been in the back half of instructional league last fall, which was cut short because of Hurricane Ian.
If all continues to go well for Green in spring training, he’ll likely start the season at Low-A Fredericksburg.
“Defensively, he has the pure speed, but he’s working on everything that goes into playing the outfield,” Watson said. “He’s had a really busy winter and hasn’t slowed down at all. He’s moving great, and hopefully he can make that club out of camp.”
The righthanded Green drives the ball to all fields. Twelve days after the draft, he hit several balls into the Nationals Park seats during a pre-game batting session with Washington players.
Green played some football as a youngster, but baseball has long been his passion.
“I’m just going to keep my head down, work hard every day, and whenever I get my time, I get my time,” he said on draft night.
Top pick Elijah Green flashes power at Nationals Park: ‘I can do everything’ =
When the Washington Nationals take batting practice, there are typically four hitters in the final group. But there was an extra player taking swings in the last round Friday: Elijah Green, the Nationals’ 2022 first-round pick. Green, 18, spent the afternoon with the Nationals after being selected fifth overall July 17.
“Just meeting all the guys, future teammates, it’s just a great experience,” Green said. “It’s really surreal, hitting [batting practice] with all of them, just talking to them, picking their brains.”
The Nationals are experiencing the expected growing pains in the first year of their rebuild, but progress from their young players, coupled with nailing their draft picks, could accelerate the process. Green, an outfielder from IMG Academy in Bradenton, Fla., was the Nationals’ highest selection since they took Bryce Harper first overall in 2010. A year ago, the Nationals drafted Brady House, a high school shortstop from Georgia, with the No. 11 pick. Green said he knew House before he was drafted and the two have talked recently.
@Haroldk12, please do not copy and paste from your sources into Wikipedia - the result is often a copyright violation. You can either post a link or simply list the article title, publication name and publication date. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:37, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Need help finding people to help with a history article...
Hey, I want to make an article about WW2, but need help finding people with same interests. I'm very knowledgeable but not an expert, and if someone could help me with this that would be amazing! ThatADHDperson (talk) 21:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well I tried to create a group/initiative but it sent me to a user landing pad thing... ThatADHDperson (talk) 21:46, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ThatADHDperson, if you want to start a discussion about potentially creating a new article, you should probably begin with a post on their talk page, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. But it might be better to get some experience fixing up existing articles first. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:55, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to create a WWII task force. They already have one: [7]. -- asilvering (talk) 21:58, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, ThatADHDperson, and welcome to the Teahouse.Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia. Are you sure that what you want to write about is not covered in any of the thousands of articles already in Category:World War II? I'm sure many of them would benefit from a knowledgable eye. (But please remember that the value of your knowledge lies in knowing where to find the information: Wikipedia articles are summaries of what has been published in reliable sources, not of what a particular editor knows, even if they are an expert. See No original research). ColinFine (talk) 21:20, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't think it is, though I haven't read each and every single one,. I could see if there's one that could use editing or more knowledge... ThatADHDperson (talk) 21:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Military History has a pretty huge cleanup backlog, if you want to try fixing some articles that already exist before diving in to bigger efforts. (See here: [8]) A lot of those are surely WWII articles. You might want to start with some of the ones under "content", like "buzzword cleanup". -- asilvering (talk) 21:46, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Uh... I have a problem, again. I know nothing of aviation or military vehicles or any of that, but that's mostly all I see there... I'm more of a dates, info kinda person... ThatADHDperson (talk) 00:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Basic things like dates are already likely to be well-covered in Wikipedia articles. But again, as ColinFine has already said, it's about knowing where to find information, not knowing the information outright. You shouldn't be adding info to wikipedia articles without sources anyway. That's part of why I recommended looking at the cleanup list; a lot of the work there is things like "fix broken links" or "remove promotional language". That's (mostly) something an editor can do regardless of what they already know about a topic. -- asilvering (talk) 00:12, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Images in Search Results
Hi, there!
New to editing Wikipedia, and I’m wondering why only some articles have images that appear in their search result, whereas others just have the template article icon?
Is there a way to set the infobox image to appear beside the short description in the search results / suggested pages?
Hi, Pickletitanic, and welcome to the Teahouse. IIRC, the image selection algorithm rejects images that are not of a certain size and aspect ratio. I'm sure somebody will come along shortly and point you at the page that explains this. ColinFine (talk) 21:22, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I made an edit to a page, added a family tree that I personally made, but it was taken down as "unreferenced/unsupported." Is there anything I can do? SeanCombsFan1 (talk) 22:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SeanCombsFan1 The Sean Combs article already has a Personal life section describing in text his relationships with the women who have had a total of seven children with him. Your figure, without explanations for color, etc., and no refs, is not a useful addition, so reverted. David notMD (talk) 22:29, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. Thanks. Would it be accepted if I added a chart legend and cited my sources for family? SeanCombsFan1 (talk) 22:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to say, basically, no. For most articles about people, the number of children is a valid part of Personal life, but not names nor ages. Given SC's complicated children history and well-publicized private life, plausible for this article. But again, the (referenced) text is sufficient. Is it your thinking that the chart conveys more information than the text? Could this be addressed by adding more text rather than the chart? David notMD (talk) 04:04, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You'll need more than one source in any case, but PhD theses are ok, yes. Though you generally want to avoid using them in favour of something more widely published. A thesis from 2010 should have a book or article spun out of it by now, if the author is still an academic. -- asilvering (talk) 22:23, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I just posted a new stub article, Richard Corbin but the links don't work, probably because when I searched for the article, the redirect I replaced (from Richard Corben) was messy and didn't capitalize the surname. Can someone please correct it for me? Thanks. Jweaver28 (talk) 23:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the links don't work, check if the target redirect page was deleted. If it's deleted, the redirect will not work I'm subscribed for everything (talk) 03:50, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How to put in-text citations in an infobox
I want to update some of the numbers in the infobox for this page. I have sources for the information, but I'm not sure how to put a citation with the text. Do I just type it in the same place as the box for the text? A. E. Katz (talk) 04:41, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, just add footnotes as usual. You can see some examples there already, for "motto", for example. -- asilvering (talk) 06:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see now, thank you! A. E. Katz (talk) 07:58, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi and welcome to the teahouse! The research is appreciated but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a source for breaking news. The aftermath of a large event can be exciting but it isn't Wikipedia's place to contribute to the excitement. While its not official policy, WP:BNS details the point nicely. If the person is still missing after some time then it will be widely reported in independent news sources.
On another note, will updating the Wikipedia article help locate this person? I believe no, in which case its best to wait and see if they turn up!
Hi there! You could help improve the article by providing multiple independent published reliable sources for the information already listed in the article. Feel free to add them yourself (presuming you have no conflict of interest) or suggesting them at the article talk page: Talk:Cansu Dere. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
CSS issues
I'm looking at a page on English Wikipedia using the mobile theme and noticed an issue with the layout. Between a picture and a sidebar there's just enough space for a few letters, so the words "Origin and early history" are spread across 19 lines, going well below the image. Not sure where to report this to. It's probably just a corner case, but makes it incredibly hard to read when it happens. This only occurs while I'm logged out, not after I log in. There's a screenshot here, taken with a fresh browser (Firefox beta after wiping app data, to ensure it's not my weird browser/extensions/settings; it shows up same in Mull, my primary browser) ⚠Efreak 06:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Efreak: I don't believe anyone is going to fix this. There are always going to be problems with narrow screens when the intendation gets to big. A similar problem arises when one attempts to view deeply-intendated comments (e.g.) at ANI on small viewport widths. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:55, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I offered some suggestions in "talk" for the stub article "Dusky Peril," but no one responded. Id like some assistance in editing and adding to this short article. Pengles (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pengles At the talk page, you provided many URLs to articles about anti-Indian discrimination in the US. Are any of these specifically about the topic of the article - what was published in a newspaper more than 100 years ago and the subsequent attack on Indian immigrants? If so, create references formatted like the ones in the article and add content and references to the article. David notMD (talk) 12:07, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why have you repeatedly sent this article page to nomination for deletion? Im Safiqul Islam (talk) 07:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hi @Im Safiqul Islam and welcome to the Teahouse! it seems that you have written an article for an organization very recently established. as such, it is very unlikely that you would have the required reliable sources (for example, mainstream news articles) that are independent (not directly connected to you, facebook and your own side don't count as independent) from you to establish the notability of your organization.
please note that Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world about you or your organization's existence. perhaps it may get an article here, but only once it becomes more firmly established enough to gain mainstream coverage.
even then, there are policies that you have to read since you are likely connected to the company: please read the policies on conflict of interest and paid editing and please disclose your conflict of interest somewhere like your own userpage. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 07:16, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Im Safiqul Islam. The article in question uses utterly inappropriate terminology such as Our society was registered and We are working on Flood Relief. That style of first person writing indicates that you misunderstand the purpose of Wikipedia. A Wikipedia article about an organization is not at all to replicate what the organization says about itself. Rather, it is to summarize what published reliable sources entirely independent of the organization have said about it. Please read the Neutral point of view, which is a core content policy. Cullen328 (talk) 07:26, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After it was nominated for deletion, you twice removed the AfD and it was twice restored. The proper place to present an argument to keep the article is at the AfD. You are also welcome to work on improving the article - specifically the reference weaknesses - while it is at AfD. However, I personally agree with the criticism there and in the above comments. Expect it to be deleted in 7-10 days. David notMD (talk) 12:20, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm working on this article, which is a stub. When I started on it, almost every section was completely blank, but only a couple sections had a tag about expansion being needed. The most extensive section only has 3 bullet points in it, every other section has either 1 or 2 points. I think the whole article needs expansion, and it seems pointless to tag every section individually. Is there a way to mark the article in general "expansion needed", or is it only possible to put the tag in specific sections? If I can't mark the whole article as needing expansion, should I add the tag under every section? I'm not sure what the best thing to do in this scenario would be. A. E. Katz (talk) 07:55, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, A E Katz. If you're working on the article anyway, why bother to tag it? The point of tags is to give notice to others that there is some work needed. ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@A. E. Katz Just to answer your question.... There is a tag for {{Expand section}} but if the whole article needs work, we prefer to use other tags, as explained at {{expand}} (a disambiguation page). Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@A. E. Katz Since I've worked on Year lists of various countries, I did a few updates to the 1940 Bulgaria for you. Searched "1940" for "Bulgaria" to find some. Thanks for asking at Teahouse. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 16:44, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I dont know what to fix to be good for accepting..
Please help me! 89.216.144.19 (talk) 11:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Reviewers have left several notes on your draft. So far, you failed to show that the subject of your draft meets Wikipedia's notability guideline. Through use of inline citations, you need to show that there is in-depth, reliable, secondary, and independent coverage of the subject. Please click on these links, and on the links provided via the decline rationales (red boxes at the top of your draft), to get further information about what these criteria entail.
The fact that the subject has an article on German Wikipedia does not mean that it will pass English Wikipedia's inclusion policy, or even German Wikipedia's inclusion policy for that matter. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 11:37, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unlock request!
Please explain the reason for locking my account. -- Karsan Chanda (talk) 11:58, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Karsan Chanda, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are not currently blocked according to your block log. Throast{{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 12:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
hello , Ive tweaked and changed the draft in answering to your feedback - two questions. How do you re-submit and I cant see a button anywhere for this . I saved the draft but I gather this is not enough , and also one reason for rejection was the board of advisors section. Was mentioned that it's not important to the page, but the board of advisors show that the company comes from a professional background with individuals who are experts in their field. Who better can this be explained within the page.
Hope you can help VoicNoir (talk) 13:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @VoicNoir, welcome to the Teahouse. I have re-added the notice which you deleted while revising, and which contains the resubmission button. Please note the line in that pink box which says: Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted.. 97.113.181.183 (talk) 13:32, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand ,thank you . Can you help regarding the board of advisors - as I feel that these individuals are important to the information as are part of the story of the brand, the thinkers behind it the creative thinking. What best way to address this ? thanks again. 2A00:23C8:CB8:301:1C5F:FF28:18CE:1DF7 (talk) 13:36, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@VoicNoir/IP editor, Wikipedia is primarily interested in what reliable secondary sources have reported about a subject, not what you, I or anyone else believes is important. If secondary sources mentioned the board or the individuals, you would have a much better case for inclusion. Unfortunately, your draft seems to be lacking any sources at all which meet our requirements and demonstrate notability. 97.113.181.183 (talk) 13:43, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So if an article mentions the board thats independent , then that would help.
The reason that you couldn't see the resubmit button is that you deleted the feedback (including where it said "<!-- Do not remove this line! -->") and comments. Those stay until the draft is accepted, to help you & future reviewers. Another editor has kindly reinstated them for you. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:35, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Readers do not care that there is a Board of Advisors, in part because there is no information about what functions a BOA has. Much of the draf remains unreferenced. David notMD (talk) 15:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Party color template
Can anybody help me a bit about how to create a Template:Party color for a party? (I'm actually trying to make it for Trinamool BNP.) I actually can't understand how to make this template for a party by reading relevant pages... Zeeshan Y Tariq (talk) 13:57, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you can implement the party color template by inserting {{Party color|<party name>}} on the page. If you put it and there's an error that the party name wasn't found, you can request it be added on the talk page for the political party page! You'll need to know what hex code color to use for the party when you make the request!
1. If a book on an artist is published by the artist, but contains important articles on him from art-experts, can i use this as a reference when i quote one of these experts? If so, would i have to add a comment like "this book contains texts from experts although it looks as if it didn't" - okay, sounds silly, but you get what i mean. In the German version of the article i did write as a comment "Ursula Teschner: . In: Ingrid Hornef (Hrsg.): . Hofheim am Taunus 1994, S. 4–5, hier S. 5 (Darin abgedruckt Fremdtexte von Erich Fitzau und Ursula Teschner).
2. Second question and this i already have asked years ago but did not really find a solution: If a book contains various articles on one subject... and you want to give the length of the article itself AND additional the page in this article from which you are quoting - in German, we do call this "Sammelwerk" and we can give not only the total number of pages like "Page=13-24" but also with the item "Fundstelle" ("Place of Finding")=page 14 - and in English up to now i only know how to give the overal pages like 13-24 - but there is no equivalent to "Fundstelle"; so i cannot give both info... how do i get this done anyway?
Hi @Naomi Hennig and welcome to the Teahouse! Some interesting questions!
Number 1 certainly seems interesting. It's partially WP:SELFSOURCE because it's published by the subject of the article, even though the author of the essay within the book is partially independent. It's possible that the essays meet the requirements of the selfsource link above, depending on the link. Perhaps you could mention it in line with the summary of the essay (e.g. "in a book published by Teschner, noted art critic Ingrid Hornef said...").
For number two, I think you're asking if you can include in the citation both the specific page for the quote and the range of pages in the same citation?
I tried it on User:SpookyTwenty/sandbox and it looks like the pages= argument takes anything provided, so you could send it pages=14-24, pp 15 and it'll show up fine! See my sandbox for that in action!
@Naomi Hennig The second part can readily be done with the template {{rp}}, to get something like [1]: 36 , where you are highlighting page 36 from a larger range.
References
^O'Neill, Robert (2014). "Coral Bell and Her Mark on Strategic Studies". In Ball, Desmond; Lee, Sheryn (eds.). Power and International Relations: Essays in Honour of Coral Bell. Canberra, Australia: ANU Press. pp. 35–38. doi:10.22459/PIR.11.2014.05. ISBN 9781925022124.
Hi all, requesting folks add WP:REFBEGIN to their watchlist. It was vandalized back on February 17th, breaking the redirect with some non-sense but went unnoticed until today. The first vandalism actually occurred on December 2nd but that did not break anything. Given it is frequently used, more eyes are needed. S0091 (talk) 15:26, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
View history of WP:REFBEGIN shows no vandalism on those dates. There was an 18 Feb entry (since revertd) on the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 16:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are right. Odd, so much problem in obscure places. David notMD (talk) 19:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Two articles were merged but the merging is wrong
Hello,
I am an expert in Machine Learning, in particular weak supervision. I have a PhD in this area. I just noticed that the page on "Semi-supervised learning" wrongfully conflates "weak supervision" with "Semi-supervised learning". While the two are related (e.g. in their motivation), they are distinct areas of Machine Learning that should not be mixed up. They should have two separate pages. Unfortunately, I have no experience with making such changes. 72.182.48.217 (talk) 16:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your expertise and advice sounds like it could be very helpful. The best approach would be to go to the 'Talk Page' of the merged article and express your concerns. Point out what is wrong, cited relevant sources to help explain the issue, and make some recommendations as to what you think should be done. Rather than expect you to understand the ins-andouts of Wikipedia editing yourself, if it's a case of suggesting rewording of a paragraph or two, simply put forward suggestion you feel would be best, and again ensure any factual statement is supported by good citations. Other editors may wish you to expand on your concerns and, if they understand the issues there, they may make the necessary changes (or maybe even unmerging). This does sound a technical area, so I'm reluctant to suggest anything more general than to ask you to expand on what needs doing at the article's talk page. The only caveat I'd make is that, because Wikipedia is generally not targetted at PhD researchers, what might sound like a key distinction to you might be seen as a trivial one to other editors. Making your case clearly and gently is the best way.
I should add that if you wanted to create a free account here, you would be able to benefit by not be revealing your IP address, but would also be able to add specific articles to a WATCHLIST which can alert you to any changes to pages of greatest interest to you, including edits to Talk page discussions. Good luck, and thanks for raising this here to begin with. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:31, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Page deletion message
Hello
I hope you can help me. I paid American Wikiwriters to create my page on Wikipedia. Their service was a scam from the get go and aside from them just getting the page up there, I had to do most of the work and editing. I have subsequently discovered that wikipedia frowns upon and does not sanction these type of services. Now I've just received an email from them telling me that if I don't act, my page will be deleted in 2 weeks. And by act, I assume that want more money to make sure my page doesn't go away. They have found a way to somehow hold the page hostage by the way they set the whole thing up no doubt. Can anyone help me understand this and how I can free my page from their influence?
I'm sorry I used them, but I certainly don't want my page taken down. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much.
Hi @Billyheimer, welcome to the Teahouse. First, please review our rules around editing with a conflict of interest, which are laid out at WP:COI. You should generally stay away from editing the article - instead you can make {{request edit}}s on the talk page. You also need to declare your COI per the page I linked.
The article is not currently nominated for deletion, though it is tagged as having been created for undisclosed payments (and the creator blocked). The question here is whether it demonstrates that the subject meets our notability guidelines (in this case, WP:NMUSIC). There are a number of sources, which is good, though they're of varying quality. Others here may take a closer look at them. I don't think the article is in any immediate danger of deletion - though it would be interesting if the folks you are in contact with tried it, because more of their accounts here would be revealed and probably blocked. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:08, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Billyheimer The article has been in mainspace for nearly a year and although it has a COI tag it doesn't look overly promotional in tone and has adequate references. However, you may now have created a Streisand effect that may lead to its being scrutinised more carefully! I would advise that your best course of action is to add additional sources that conform to our requirements, by suggesting them on the Talk Page, using {{edit request}}s. Do NOT edit the article directly. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:11, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Billyheimer: Hi there! I've reverted/removed much of the information you added without any independent published reliable sources. Feel free to use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard to suggest improvements to the article - with sources. (Note: It's not correct to describe the article as "my page" - see WP:OWN.) Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Billyheimer. Properly disclosed ethical paid editing is permitted as long as the edits comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Undisclosed paid editing is inherently a policy violation from the beginning and such unethical people routinely violate other policies and guidelines, and lie to their clients. Clearly, this operation is in that second group. The article was created by a sockpuppet account set up to deceive, and that account is connected to a massive network of other blocked sockpuppet accounts. I recommend that you forward all relevant emails to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org. Cullen328 (talk) 17:31, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Billyheimer: another point in addition to the good advice above: there is no shame in using the services of paid editors. You should, however, avoid the ones that are scams. Some (as here) are specialized Wikipedia "sock farms" that rotate new accounts to try to fly under the radar with their poor edits, and most of what they create is reverted or deleted within a year; some are general PR firms that think they can write a "profile in Wikipedia" as if they were writing on the company website; and some are actually competent.
A good test is to ask them for their account name and check it at Special:Contributions - if the account has existed for a long time, properly discloses their paid-editor status, and is not blocked, there is a good chance that it is one of the (few) reputable ones. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 17:35, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A cursory glance shows at least 5 sources fail verification and one is a dead link. Theroadislong (talk) 17:32, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Their claim that the page will be deleted within two weeks if you don't pay them is no more credible than any of their previous claims. It may be deleted (I don't know, I haven't even looked at it), but it won't be their doing. They're just trying to extract a few more dollars from a failed project. Maproom (talk) 19:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict) To return to the threat of deletion - the creator has no power to delete the article, and actually, the account it was created with has been blocked. Best they could do is start a new account and start an Articles for deletion process. AfDs go on for a week or two, and then an Administrator makes a decision. Given that the article is about you (well, you saying it is), the path is for you to declare your COI and make recommendations on the Talk page. David notMD (talk) 19:25, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
XCF convertion
I've been having lots of trouble lately with trying to find a good method of converting a Gimp XCF file with transparent parts to a Jpeg one that has transparent parts. Is there anything that I'm doing wrong and am I supposed to convert the file to something else to retain the transparency? Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 18:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Rugoconites Tenuirugosus, welcome to the Teahouse. This seems to be a general computing question rather than one directly related to using or editing Wikipedia, so you'd probably get better answers if you asked at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:12, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Problem with weatherboxes
In the extremes snow depth line in weatherboxes, it says that the metric unit in parentheses should be millimeters, but in the table the data gets converted to centimeters by default. How could this be fixed? Akamaikai (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
--CiaPan (talk) 08:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Done. Wētā Workshop likewise. Throast {{ping}} me! (talk | contribs) 20:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Courtesy link: Talk:Dusky Peril
