What we have above is a sock posing as two editors, Girly Fungi and StrawberryChi'sCake, trolling this board. All socks put in their drawers.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:11, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi I am new here and really want to start editing different articles here on Wikipedia. My question is how do I find articles to edit and is there some sort of software/bot that will automatically send me stuff I can start editing if I don’t know where to begin? Also, is there some sort of tutorial on making sure I’m following proper guidelines when making edits? Any help would be greatly appreciated as I start my journey here on Wikipedia. 2600:100D:B026:E491:7C2F:A20E:8E6D:9B79 (talk) 22:15, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! If you create an account, you will have access to the newcomer homepage, which can offer some suggested pages to edit based on your interests, or you might choose to simply look through the pages on topics that interest you for errors. Don't worry too much about breaking anything - there are loads of other editors who are here to help, and if you make a mistake, chances are it will be fixed quickly. You can visit Help:Introduction for a set of tutorials to help you, if you like. If you have any other questions as you go, please feel free to ask! Tollens (talk) 22:27, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Your first step should be to create an account. Then post a comment on this thread under your account name, so that other users who may wish to help you can access your "talk" page. There are some helpful links that I can share with you. Pecopteris (talk) 23:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) § Notifications hard to see on mobile

 – Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 00:17, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia article about Michail Onufrienko. Biography. "In 2014, ... Subsequently, he moved to the Russian peninsula of Crimea." Isn't, according to Wikipedia, Crimea part of Ukraine? 62.235.120.82 (talk) 20:16, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. Wikipedia articles reflect what its reliable sources say: there is no "according to Wikipedia". In the context of the article Michail Onufrienko the text should reflect what the source it cites says. As I don't speak Russian, I don't know what that is! Of course, one could edit the article to merely say "the Crimean peninsula", thus avoiding the issue. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:39, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

(EC) @Mike Turnbull The relevant part of the source (specifically, the second paragraph below their 'infobox') says

Личную жизнь публицист не афиширует. Считается, что фактами о близких мужчина не делится в целях безопасности. Тем не менее, известно, что журналист женат. Пара воспитывает дочь. После событий 2014 года Онуфриенко перебрался в Россию, потом на Донбасс. Говорят, сейчас проживает на территории Крыма.

Translation (ru → en) by Google:

The publicist does not advertise his personal life. It is believed that a man does not share facts about loved ones for security reasons. However, it is known that the journalist is married. The couple is raising a daughter. After the events of 2014, Onufrienko moved to Russia, then to the Donbass. They say that now lives in the Crimea.

So the source does not call the Crimea Russian. I have fixed the article to reflect what the source says. --CiaPan (talk) 21:05, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm sure others will comment on the "according to Wikipedia" part - but in terms of the content you've highlighted, I have a strong perspective which may spark disagreement.

According to the objective reality on the ground, Crimea is a part of Russia, regardless of anyone's subjective feelings on the matter. It is militarily and economically completely dominated by, and integrated into, greater Russia. Ukraine has absolutely no control whatsoever over the territory, and there is no viable path towards regaining such control. Crimea is as much a part of Ukraine as Taiwan is a part of China - only in the realm of fantasy. Some countries recognize this, others do not. Which side of the question a given country is on depends almost entirely on their own carefully calculated geopolitical self-interest in regards to their relationship with Russia. The media from those countries will usually parrot whatever opinion is held by their government, with little interest in or regard for the cold, hard facts of the situation.

So, if Wikipedia says that Crimea is a part of Ukraine, it is taking a fringe view, held by some (mostly) Western governments for political reasons (and certainly held by the Ukrainian government). It is parroted by their media in an effort to show "solidarity" with Ukraine, but not supported by evidence. If a source that's otherwise reliable describes Crimea as currently being a part of Ukraine, I'd say the reliability of the source should be called into question on that particular issue, due to POV/bias issues. The sentence you quote should not be changed, unless an inexpressibly-unlikely scenario unfolds wherein Ukraine retakes Crimea at a later date. That's my two cents. Good day. Pecopteris (talk) 20:57, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

It is by no means a "fringe view" that Crimea is Ukrainian territory under occupation, even just based on UN votes. Nor it is accurate that there "is no viable path" for Ukraine to reassert its control. 331dot (talk) 21:06, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh boy, I opened up a can of worms, didn't I? This could get very involved very fast. Geopolitics is my life, so I'm happy to go there, but I think most other editors would be decidedly unhappy if we went there on this page for thousands of bytes. You are absolutely right that there's a blurry line between "occupation" and "control, to the point of incorporation into the occupier's country".

I was referring only to the day-to-day reality as it is currently, which is that if you traveled to Crimea today, on 1 Sep 2023, you would find yourself in a world controlled legally, economically, and militarily by Russia. (Legally, in the sense that Russian laws are enforced by Russian policemen and Russian courts).

The more salient question is how Crimea should be handled on Wikipedia. I think CiaPan did the right thing by looking back to the source. I also think that if it's not necessary to label Crimea "Ukrainian" or "Russian" in a given context, it's best not to label it. It's probably also best to avoid stating "Crimea is a part of Russia" or "Crimea is a part of Ukraine" in Wikivoice, anywhere, due to the ability for users to cherry-pick sources to justify their POV and turn the page into a battleground. Pecopteris (talk) 21:20, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I think we should do what Mike Turnbull suggested and just avoid the issue whenever possible. That said, I do have some minor agreement with part of what Pecopteris said. You can call it occupation or whatever, that may be important in some articles. But it's true the reality on the ground at the moment is that Russia controls the territory, illegally perhaps, but they do. And so anyone who moves to Crimea is putting themselves in Russian controlled territory with the full consequences that entails such as putting themselves at the mercy of the Russian legal system (which evidence suggests is of significant consequence) and also needing to follow their migration controls. Just saying it is Ukrainian territory in a situation like this is IMO not likely to be sufficient without clarification. We can debate whether just saying it's Russian territory is sufficient, perhaps it's not. But in a case like this where we're discussing someone who moved there, it's definitely better than just saying it's Ukrainian territory. Perhaps Ukraine will take back control in the future and impose their legal system again, even on stuff that happened while they were not in control, but until that happens it's not the reality on the ground. I mean the fact that Ukraine has an active interest, and perhaps a legal right to do so makes it more likely but we shouldn't forget such things can always happen so to some extent there's always recognition things can change. E.g. in 2005, I'm sure not that many people thought Crimea would be under Russian control in 10 years but then it was. Nil Einne (talk) 02:21, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

There is a person with no account, keeps removing the latest image for Barry Keoghan

, and replacing it with an older one (2017), where you cannot even see his eyes. The 2020 image is being used extensively by many versions of Wikipedia all around the world, and yet this person keeps reverting to the older image, not even keeping the newer version within the article lower down. Can someone advise what should be done here? James Kevin McMahon (talk) 08:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

• It's purely down to personal choice, really. Neither image is ideal - the newer one is quite dark whereas the older one is sharper and brighter, but is not the best angle as you say. Of course, the best plan would be to find a better free image. Black Kite (talk) 08:47, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi James Kevin McMahon. Since both images appear to equivalent in terms of copyright status, it's basically come down to whether a WP:CONSENSUS can be established one way or another. Since there's no clear based Wikipedia policy reason (e.g. copyright violation) to favor the use of one image over the other, you should start a discussion on the article's talk page and propose the current image be replaced with the one you want to use. If a consensus can be established in favor of such a change, then it will be made. In addition, since both images are OK for a copyright standpoint, it might be possible to incorporate both of them into the article in some way. The thing that you absolutely don't want to do here is keep trying to force the image you would like to be used into the main infobox. The user who removed the image left an edit summary explaining why (jpeg images are preferred to png images) for the main infobox of BLPs. The is a specific enough reason to assume that they're not just removing the file to be a pain in the butt or as some type of random vandalism; in other words, they seem to have a valid concern with is worth discussing on the article's talk page. If the format of the more recent image is the only real problem the other user has with using it, then perhaps someone at WP:GL/P can help with that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:56, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

My work here is being victimised by someone who does not even have an account, and the only response I get is that it is ok for this person to behave in this manner. I am disappointed with the response from the Wikipedia community on this matter.James Kevin McMahon (talk) 20:31, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@James Kevin McMahon: As this is a matter of needing consensus, discuss this with the IP at Talk:Barry Keoghan. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:54, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@James Kevin McMahon: You're not required and never have been required to register for an account to edit Wikipedia, and IP users are peope too who are also part of the Wikipedia community; so, neither your account status nor the other user's account status seem relevant in any way to this dispute. I also don't see how you're work is being victimized here after looking at the page's history; however, you're free to start a discussion about that at WP:ANI if you feel they're behavioral issues involved. In my opinion, you're involved in a content dispute and those are best resolved through WP:DR. Content disputes happen all of the time and almost never are personal in nature until one side makes them that way. The WP:ONUS generally falls on the person wanting to make a change to establish a WP:CONSENSUS for doing so, and generally the best way to do this is to seek input from others via discussion on article talk pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:19, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I didn't realize you had already started a discussion about this on the article's talk page when I posted my last comment, so my apologies for suggesting once again that you do so. However, as I mentioned above, the fact that the other editor edits using an IP account is irrelevant and trying to make that an issue is unlikely going lead to a consensus in favor of a change in the infobox image. More pertinent to the topic at hand is WP:IUP#FORMAT, which kind of implies the IP user's concerns might not be trivial. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:09, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I have a new draft for Draft:Nick Mansfield (artist). To me, the sources I have look like RS that are independent of the subject, but after submitting to WP:AFC, I'm told they aren't. I would like to get further opinions here to find out which, if any or all, aren't good and why. Filmforme (talk) 04:45, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Filmforme: Well, the first source isn't about the photographer, it's about one of his exhibits, so that wouldn't count.

The next three are all local San Diego publications, and we generally need coverage of national or at least regional scope.

The second source is a local city tabloid, which we'd prefer not to use. And the citation wasn't precise enough for me to find any article without scrolling through every page. I couldn't find it.

The third source is good coverage of the artist's death.

The last source, I don't know what to make of. It's the author's personal views about a kayak trip with the photographer, and isn't really about him.

So of all those, the only source I think is worthwhile is that obituary. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:14, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

[1]

Clearly, this is an openly biased source. Therefore, I wouldn't trust it for factual reporting. However, I think it would be appropriate for attributed opinions, as long as due weight is applied. Do you agree, or disagree? Why? Thanks. Philomathes2357 (talk) 05:24, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Looks about as reliable as the World Socialist Website, run a Trotskyist organization called the Socialist Equality Party.

WP:RSPS says the following of the World Socialist Web Site: "Most editors consider it to be reliable for the attributed opinions of its authors. There is no consensus on whether it is reliable for factual reporting. If used, it must be evaluated for due weight as it is an opinionated source."

I'd apply the same standard to your source. Pecopteris (talk) 05:33, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

These articles looks way off

• Chelsea Dickenson
• Justin Lo
• Daphne Khoo
• T._S. Suresh

2607:FB91:882F:557A:AD4:1551:8009:A673 (talk) 01:30, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

They both have already have notices at the top that they need more work. RudolfRed (talk) 01:35, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

And please don't edit your post after someone has replied. RudolfRed (talk) 01:53, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Why do I feel this concerns me? I have previously/recently edited all the 4 articles Jeraxmoira (talk) 06:24, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

The reviewer of the draft effectively said that the article needs a significant rewrite and discussion, which I assume implies WP:TNT. However, I don't think that guideline would be appropriate since the draft is sourced fairly well. I came here because I might be incorrectly interpreting this guideline and would like some comment from a more experienced editor. Tintinthereporter226 09:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Pinging @Robert McClenon:, who rejected the draft. Ca ^{talk to me!} 10:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ca and Tintinthereporter226: - I seldom reject a draft unless there is a specific problem or unless the draft is itself a problem. Reviewers normally decline drafts rather than rejecting drafts. There is a specific problem. I rejected the draft because the title of the draft, The Phillips Academy Poll, was and is a locked redirect to Phillips Academy. I couldn't have accepted the draft even if I wanted to accept it. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Phillips Academy Poll. An AFC reviewer cannot overturn an AFD. But, while we are here, I will ask a question of the other editors here. What should a reviewer advise the submitter to do when a title is salted? What advice should I give to the submitter, or what advice does the community here give to the submitter? I have previously advised submitters to go to Deletion Review to request desalting, and have been criticized for that advice. Should the submitter go to Requests for Page Protection to request unprotection? Where should a submitter go to request that a locked redirect be unlocked (which is a form of desalting)? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:32, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Contact any admin, or follow procedure at WP:SALT. Mathglot (talk) 06:40, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello all, Please I need help on how to succesfully install my CSD log. I am a New Page Patrol Student, and I was instructed to install CSD log for my assignment. I have installed it and carry out the assignment but teacher complained that my CSD log is empty. If anyone knows how to fix it should contact me pls. Best.Uncle Bash007 (talk) 08:29, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Install Twinkle in your preferences and configure it there. Cabayi (talk) 08:32, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @Cabayi Uncle Bash007 (talk) 08:38, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

i dont have time, but  Courtesy link: User:Music1201/MyCSD.js - unmaintained? if anyone would take a look, would probably be helpful! NotAGenious (talk) 13:15, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I have a draft for a biography. I did find credits at the British Film Institute, but I know of no way to add other credits outside of IMDB. Starlighsky (talk) 22:39, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Starlighsky: If it is online, you can use {{Cite web}}. See WP:REFB for more help on citing your sources. IMDB should not be used anyway, since much of it is user generated. RudolfRed (talk) 00:24, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Starlighsky, and welcome to the Teahouse. RudolfRed, I think the question was about finding the sources, not about how to cite them.

Starlighsky, that is the big question, and the reason that creating Wikipedia articles is often so much harder than it looks. If you know film magazines that are more solid than just gossip sheets, you could see if they cover it. Otherwise, Google is your friend. If you're not sure whether a particular source is reliable, RSN is the place to go (there is a list of sources commonly asked about at RSP). But if you can't find sources that are reliable, and independent of the subject, and that discuss the subject at some length, then I'm afraid the chances are that the subject does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and there's no point in spending any more time on this.

It sounds as if, like almost all new editors who try to create articles, you have written your draft BACKWARDS. Sorry. ColinFine (talk) 10:29, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I do just want to offer a perspective that IMDB screens its entries. However, I respect Wikipedia's opinion. Starlighsky (talk)Starlighsky 13:40, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

i.e. → (section name) 2605:B40:1303:900:B914:3BD0:A72B:38ED (talk) 15:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, you can use this markup here: /* section name */ Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:54, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Never mind, found out 2605:B40:1303:900:B914:3BD0:A72B:38ED (talk) 15:54, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Out of curiosity what is the rationale for not having this page? I get during the early days Chandler would not be considered notable, but post 2021 the media coverage (in addition to the huge fan base) seems to more than justify a page. I'm honestly surprised no one has asked this question yet. I see the earlier deletion discussions, but could someone point me to something more recent? HaileJones (talk) 18:58, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @HaileJones, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm not sure I understand your question. Can you make your statement clearer? StrawberryChi'sCake (talk) 19:26, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

There is no Wikipedia article for Chris-Chan. What is the current justification for this? HaileJones (talk) 19:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Some of the most recent stuff can be found here. Let's just say from past experiences and prior situations, you'd have to make a very strong BLP-compliant case. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:37, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. HaileJones (talk) 19:39, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I would add this DRV as part of the same episode, providing a perhaps more formal justification. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

So broadly speaking Wikipedia's policy is to discount the importance of an individual who has experienced harassment campaigns unless the coverage is more significant than in the Chandler case? I presume that the media coverage of the Stanford rape case was too extensive to not have an article despite the harassment. HaileJones (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are created by volunteers like you. If you want to recreate the article please ensure it adheres to WP:BLP. Note that having a "huge fan base" does not contribute to notability. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:36, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

The original title Chris Chan was salted because of repeated BLP and harassment issues stemming from hate campaigns like those stemming from Kiwi Farms. Lavalizard101 (talk) 19:38, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

We are currently forbidden to create the article in question. I would cite the extensive media coverage of this individual as justification for notability. Clearly it is a controversial topic - I am seeking to understand why. HaileJones (talk) 19:39, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

HaileJones, Chris Chan has been salted and can only be created by an administrator. That person has been the subject of malicious trolling and harassment for many years. If you go to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, and search for "Chris Chan" in the archives, you can find extensive discussion of the serious problems caused by editors obsessed with Chris Chan. I consider it unlikely that an article about this person will be approved any time soon. Cullen328 (talk) 19:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Indeed the harassment has spanned at least a decade or two. Lavalizard101 (talk) 20:02, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

I also suggest you take a careful look at that media coverage with an eye towards WP:BLP and WP:RS (perhaps also looking at WP:RSPS) and with due consideration towards WP:GNG. I think you'll find that this "extensive media coverage" is a lot more shallow than it seems at first glance with a lot of those sources tabloids unsuitable for a BLP and maybe even unsuitable for Wikipedia point blank. Further a lot of that coverage is not the sort of indepth coverage of the person you'd expect for a BLP but instead about specific things. And given the issues highlighted above and in earlier discussions, there's very good reason for us to lean strongly on 'no article' if it's at all borderline. Nil Einne (talk) 02:11, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, this is a better point. HaileJones (talk) 18:17, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

On the article The Grayzone, a content dispute has arisen. In the second paragraph of the lead, it currently reads:

"It is known for critical coverage of the US and its foreign policy, and misleading reporting, and sympathetic coverage of authoritarian regimes".

The part I'm concerned about is "misleading reporting". This Wikivoice statement cites only one source: an essay called "How to Abolish the Police in Hong Kong". The citation simply asserts "The Grayzone is known for misleading reporting", with no corroborating evidence or examples.

I don't think that this single source is sufficient for us to be saying, in Wikivoice, that an outlet is "known for misleading reporting". I find it questionable from an encyclopedic perspective, from an NPOV perspective, from a WP:DUE perspective, and possibly from a WP:BLPGROUP perspective, too.

Not to mention that the sentence is grammatically incorrect. Instead, I think this statement belongs in the "response" section, attributed to the authors of the essay.

There is another editor who feels that this must be stated in Wikivoice in the lead - attributing it in the "response" section simply will not do.

I'm having a hard time understanding the logic, and no argument has been presented other than "there is no consensus to remove this". But after I removed it, multiple other editors worked on the page without objection to my edit - only one editor seems to be defending the wording ATM, but that may change.

So, I'm appealing to the broader community. Is this "misleading reporting" statement appropriate? Is the single source cited of sufficient quality and expertise to justify repeating its opinions in Wikivoice? Are there potential WP:BLPGROUP concerns here? Am I missing the mark - is the sentence actually essential for the integrity of the article? Am I substantively damaging the article by suggesting that the sentence be attributed? Please share your opinions. Thank you. Philomathes2357 (talk) 16:17, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

My two cents: this is an open and shut case. There's no way that such a strong, accusatory statement can be made in Wikivoice with this lone source. This looks tendentious to me. Not sure about BLPGROUP, but I think you're right that a case could be made. I say: you must attribute it. This is so bad that I'm tempted to do it myself, but I will wait to see other editor feedback, and I highly encourage Philomathes to do the same - and please avoid edit warring, no matter what. Good day. Pecopteris (talk) 17:01, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree, and this is why I tried to work with the editor to reach a compromise. When he told me I had "removed an RS", I re-incorporated it, but he was not satisfied. I feel that he has been engaged in an edit war, and I've been trying to reach a mutually agreeable position. Philomathes2357 (talk) 17:20, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

To be blunt, Philomathes, although I agree with you on substance - it takes two to edit war. You've done the right thing by bringing the question to broader attention, but going back and forth with the other editor is unlikely to convince anyone of your position, and it isn't a good look for either of you. I encourage you (both of you, frankly) to take a step back and give the community at least 24 hours to respond to your thoughts before you edit The Grayzone again. Pecopteris (talk) 17:23, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

There is another editor who feels that this must be stated in Wikivoice in the lead - attributing it in the "response" section simply will not do. I never said any of that. If an editor who wasnt WP:POVPUSHing edit warring and WP:NOTGETTINGIT removed it, it would be different. But you were, and other editors asked you to stop

This is so bad that I'm tempted to do it myself, but I will wait to see other editor feedback Im fine with an uninvolved editor doing it

I feel that he has been engaged in an edit war, and I've been trying to reach a mutually agreeable position.

and this is why I tried to work with the editor to reach a compromise After not getting consensus on talk before, you didnt go back there until after posting here.

I encourage you (both of you, frankly) to take a step back and give the community at least 24 hours to respond to your thoughts before you edit The Grayzone again The community asked Philomathes to drop it several times. They have been bludgeoning the talk page, which already had the topic raised. Ping @Doug Weller Softlemonades (talk) 19:03, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Softlemonades: Since I've been made aware of this content dispute, I've noticed that your comments are overly focused on Philomathes. I don't think the community at large would find that impressive. Philomathes' behavior has significant room for improvement: in particular, their comments are far too detailed and philosophical for the average editor to follow, and this can dissuade other editors from collaborating with them. I must say, your behavior towards Philomathes isn't exactly laudable or collaborative, either.

I'd encourage you to focus exclusively on the content dispute in question, and not on Philomathes. If their behavior is truly awful, there is always WP:ANI. Likewise, I'd encourage Philomathes to keep any further comments to themselves, unless they have a (very brief) remark which is urgently and immediately relevant to the content dispute. As I advised Philo above, complaining about other editors' perceived slights against you instead of discussing content is unacceptable.

If neither of you have anything else to say about the content dispute, I really implore you both to step back and let other editors take a look. If other editors see that this has turned into a battleground, they won't want to jump in and offer their opinion for fear of drudgery and harassment. On that note, I'm done here - I made my position clear, and I have nothing more to say. Pecopteris (talk) 19:30, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you your reply. Suggestions on how to be a better editor and improve help me, and I will try to remember it

I added to my comment while you replied and did not see your reply until after. I dont think it changes your comment. The diff is [2]. Softlemonades (talk) 19:37, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

ola estou a tentar criar uma pagina para uma empresa que ainda nao e bem conhecida Kamavagas (talk) 04:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

hola, puedes traducir este texto al ingles por favor? (asking editor to translate his question to English) Pecopteris (talk) 04:13, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Kamavagas Espero que você esteja bem. Esta é a Wikipedia em inglês e você deve usar o idioma inglês aqui durante a discussão. No que diz respeito ao seu pedido, você está dizendo que deseja criar uma página de uma empresa que não é muito conhecida. Então, quero que você saiba que a Wikipedia não é o lugar certo para algo que não é conhecido. Obrigado. ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 08:28, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Translation: Hi, I am trying to create a page for a business which is yet not well known.

Hi, could you translate this text into English please?

I hope you are well. This is English Wikipedia and you must use the English idiom here during the discussion. With regard to your request, you are saying that you wish to create a page for a business that is not well known. Then, I wish that you know that Wikipedia is certainly not the place for something that is not known. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7B:124:3D00:2B8D:308D:B18C:5BD8 (talk) 08:57, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

"...must use the English language here..."; and "...that Wikipedia is not the right place for...". Otherwise, the rest is okay. Mathglot (talk) 20:13, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

should i use british english or american english on canadian articles? Iljhgtn (talk) 19:59, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I think MOS:ENGVAR is the most thorough treatment of this topic available. To answer your question: I would err on the side of British English in articles that are about Canada. Pecopteris (talk) 20:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Iljhgtn. Use Canadian English in articles about Canadian topics. Cullen328 (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Why didn't I say that? Duh! I've read studies which state that, when presented with a false dichotomy and asked to state the correct answer to a question, most people will pick one of the two choices offered, even if they are both wrong answers. My comment was an example of this. Thank you for providing the correct answer, @Cullen328. Pecopteris (talk) 20:12, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Interestingly, User:Iljhgtn/Tools already contains the correct answer to Iljhgtn's question. Cullen328 (talk) 20:15, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

that is interesting. i forgot i even had that Iljhgtn (talk) 20:26, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

sorry, i did not mean to present a "false dichotimy" either. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:27, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hey, no worries. I wasn't trying to suggest that you did anything wrong. The brain fart was on my end. Pecopteris (talk) 20:31, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

how can i convert the timestamps that i see in edit history to my time zone? I am in virginia (usa). Iljhgtn (talk) 18:39, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @Iljhgtn, and welcome to the Teahouse!

One way to change your time zone is to look at your preferences. I also recommend you see the Wikipedia:Comments in Local Time page.

Did this answer your question? StrawberryChi'sCake (talk) 19:23, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

i just updated that. My local time now is 15:28 just as an example, but it only seems to work for comments? i want it to work for viewing when edits were made in the view histroy section Iljhgtn (talk) 19:29, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn I think that your best bet is to set your time zone in your global preferences at Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-rendering Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:37, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering also works here at the English Wikipedia. You enabled a feature at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

i live in richmond, so i just chose the NYC timezone. hopefully it works now. i guess this response i will see it it leaves it as 11:01am for me, which is my current time.. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:01, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

strange, i saw 15:01... that is not richmond or NYC... i dont know why it is still doing the UTC thing. Iljhgtn (talk) 15:02, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Have you set the wanted time zone at Special:GlobalPreferences#mw-prefsection-rendering or Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering and clicked Save at the bottom? Are you referring to page histories here at the English Wikipedia like [3]? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:41, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

yes i clicked save and did that. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Are you logged in when you view the page history and using the same browser as when you edit? There are some apps which may display differently but your edits show no signs of using them. If I select "America/New York" under "Time zone" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering and view the page history of this page while logged in then the time for your above post "yes i clicked save and did that" says 15:36. What does it say for you? By the page history I mean [4] and not something you see after clicking a link in the page history. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:08, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Is there any rationale between which individuals are described as British and which are described as English?

I ask as I recently looked up the actors in the finale of What we do in the Shadows and that made me concerned that perhaps a unconscious racial bias has seeped in? Of the four actors born in England in the finale Matt Berry is the only one described as English. Natasia Demetriou is described as English-Cypriot, and both Kayvan Novak and Benedict Wong are described as British.

I haven't conducted any systemic study but it does seem to be a running theme on comedians and actors pages. Similarly I just checked the cast of Westworld, and only Thandiwe Newton is listed as British, all the other actors from the UK are listed as either English (or in Anthony Hopkins case Welsh American).

Perhaps there needs to be some consistent guidance on this? Otherwise wikipedia seems to be suggesting some racialised view where only white people can be English etc. 84.71.109.118 (talk) 11:18, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree this is unsatifactory, but the rationale is that Wikipedia simply reports what reliable sources say. If someone is described as British then we inevitably have to follow suit unless we can find a more specific reliable source. I personally don't care whether I'm described as English or British, and I suspect many English people feel the same. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:28, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but none of those examples seem to be tagged with a source when making the determination, it seems to be held as one of those uncontentious facts. Another British comic; Shaparak Khorsandi's page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaparak_Khorsandi) lists her as British, and cites her show "Oh my country!" but that show is explicitly about her love of England and how she see herself as English. Wouldn't it be easier to follow the example of every other country and just call anyone with UK citizenship British? rather than just those from ethnic minorities? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.109.118 (talk) 11:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

As you would expect, this has been discussed many times before, e.g. WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1041#British_or_English_on_lead? There is also guidance at WP:UKNATIONALS. Passports in the UK reflect the fact that we are UK citizens, irrespective of nationality, ethnicity or race. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

National identity in the UK is complex. It's a sweeping generalisation, I know, but I strongly suspect there is a much stronger national identity to Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish, than to English. It would raise more problems than it solves, if all UK citizens were described as "British". The descriptions are open to challenge, of course. I'm not sure why Wong isn't "English", though Newton and Novak were born and brought up in London, the UK capital, so could easily be seen as "British". Sionk (talk) 12:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Mike and Sionk, but the guidance doesn't seem to address the issue of racial bias. The point Mike is irregardless of race a british citizen can have their nationality listed as either British or as one of the constituent countries yet when it comes to non white people there seems to be assumption that they can't be English, or Scottish because they are not white so instead they are assumed to be British. Take Hardeep Singh Kohli is an SNP member, identifies as Scottish, is for Scottish independence yet he's listed as British. Perhaps the article Mike's cite should be updated to warn editors not just to assume because someone isn't white they aren't English, Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.109.118 (talk) 13:55, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Everyone from the UK should be described as British, whether they like it or not.

Only places and things should be described as English, Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish, ie English cafe, Scottish invention, Welsh mountain, and Northern Irish village etc.

However most people refuse to follow that rule, and describe people from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish, sometimes even Irish in Northern Irelands case, yet all English people are always described as British. Danstarr69 (talk) 16:18, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Everyone from the UK should be described as British, whether they like it or not. This would lead to a lot of arguments over articles for people from Northern Ireland. The best solution is to decribe people as reliable sources describe them, or as the subject describes themselves. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 21:35, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

There was a recent thread on Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors with a similar dispute about Soviet or Russian. DuncanHill (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

The URL for this university is broken. When I did a Google Search, I couldn't find an official website. Can anybody determine if this institution still exists and if the official website has moved? Kk.urban (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Kk.urban. Google's cache shows the website worked earlier this week. Make the Google search site:usat.edu, click the vertical dots icon to the right of a url, click the down-arrow at the top right, and click "Cached". I don't know whether the site is coming back. I didn't find anything newer than 2018 in the cached pages and [5] says USAT was "effectively closed" in December 2018. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:28, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

I am looking to make some edits to Bhopal disaster - specifically, adding specific page citations for existing sources. One such source^[1] has numbered sections (6, 6.1, 6.1.1, etc.) and restarts page numbering with every top-level section. If I want to cite something in section 8.2.3 using {{rp}}, should I just do^[1]: 8.2.3, or cite both section and page, like ^{[1]: 8.2.3 p. 2}? Thanks. Ballinskary (talk) 00:27, 1 September 2023 (UTC) Ballinskary (talk) 00:27, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Also, not sure if I'm not supposed to cite on this page (or pages like it) but I wasn't really sure how else to illustrate my question. Ballinskary (talk) 02:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ballinskary Citing like you did here is fine, provided you use the {{Reflist-talk}} template so that the citation remains with the thread (as you did). As you have found out, the {{rp}} template takes as its parameter any text you like, so I think the answer to your question is to use whatever will help the reader the most if they wish to verify that the source supports the information Wikipedia says it does. If the sections are small, then the first version you gave will be fine but if each section is large, then the second version would be better, assuming that the key information is located specifically on that page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:01, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

P.S. In this instance, I don't think that the archive URL is helpful as it relates to a Google books link, not the DOI link, which should be marked as |doi-access=free, since the text is freely available. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:04, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Ballinskary,

@Michael D. Turnbull This is all very helpful, thank you. I just want to better understand your second point. Is the archive URL superfluous here? Would it make sense to modify the existing citation to remove the archive URL altogether and add the "free" doi-access indicator? Ballinskary (talk) 12:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ballinskary Yes, I think so. Full information at WP:DOI. When the access=free parameter is used, the linking in the title will go to the doi's target, rather than the Google books target as at present. That's usually better as Google normally doesn't give access to the full text. However, in this case, the Google URL leads to a full 208-page .pdf, so which to use is debatable! Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:47, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help, @Michael D. Turnbull. Ballinskary (talk) 16:16, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

In addition to what Turnbull said, I feel with rp that long, it would introduce awkward looking gaps in text. I recommend using Help:Shortened footnotes instead. Ca ^{talk to me!} 11:03, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense, @Ca. Would something like this^[2] make sense? Ballinskary (talk) 12:30, 1 September 2023 (UTC) Ballinskary (talk) 12:30, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Yep, perfect! Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:31, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, @Ca! Ballinskary (talk) 16:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Ballinskary, whether you use {{rp}} or {{sfn}} (I'd go with the latter), you can separate section and page using param |loc=, so, for example:

In a study of 113 patients,^[3] psychological problems included PTSD,^[4] and and memory impairment.^{[1]: 4, § 8.1.2.4}

which is slightly better because of metadata issues, and has documentary value for editors following after. (Note two sfn's and one rp above.) Mathglot (talk) 03:45, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, @Mathglot, that's good to know. Is there any specific advantage to using a section sign versus not using one, or is it just a different citation style? Ballinskary (talk) 13:54, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ballinskary: I would only use it in cases where there was good reason to, such as matching existing usage in other refs or in the article, or even better, because that's what sources used. Otherwise, it might be opaque to ESL speakers. Mostly I was just trying to max out options in the examples for you. Mathglot (talk) 18:08, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot Thanks again for the tips, much appreciated. Ballinskary (talk) 23:26, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ballinskary: You're more than welcome. You may be able to help me, as well. I realize this is a tricky citation issue, and I've been trying to come up with a good description of it that could be useful in the general case. It's not quite ready yet, but when it is, it would be useful to have your feedback about it, as I may be too familiar with it to see the pain points or the parts that are unclear to someone new to it. May I ping you from the page for your opinions about it? It might not be today. Mathglot (talk) 00:02, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot Of course, I'd be happy to help. I'll keep an eye out for the ping. Ballinskary (talk) 00:12, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, i am having a bit of trouble with creating the Infobox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?create=Create+page&mfnoscript=1&title=Burning+Men# I'll add everything else including the sources once I can get the Infobox fixed, also doesn't appear to be a draft,can it be added as draft too please Veganpurplefox (talk) 00:14, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Veganpurplefox. Your infobox template is incomplete. It lacks the closing curly brackets. Please see Template:Infobox film for what is needed. Cullen328 (talk) 00:20, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

 Fixed and draftified. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 00:21, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

thank you! Veganpurplefox (talk) 00:24, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

to whomever this may concern: I would like to edit the Ekseption page to somehow explain the origin of the name "Super B." for the track on Spin's second album, Whirlwind (1977). I had the wonderful experience of interviewing the keyboardist who wrote the song, Hans Jensen, who told me the amusing anecdote that the song is named after a "very pretty girl" he met in Thailand whose nickname was Super B (Super Boobs). My edit was removed because it wasn't "constructive"? Is there a way for me to add that in the footnotes? 130.132.173.219 (talk) 03:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello - the edit was likely removed because many edits that are purely intended to be disruptive can look similar to yours (though I don't believe you intended to be disruptive at all). Unfortunately, Wikipedia has a policy prohibiting the use of original research in articles - unless this information has been published already in a reliable source it cannot be included as others have no way to verify that the information is true. If this is published somewhere, you can add a reference to that source and restore the edit. Tollens (talk) 03:56, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Colonial American County Courthouse Architecture

If a submission lacks the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article, does that mean the language is too informal or that it contains overly technical language and jargon for the average wikipedia user? Also, what would be an example of peacock terms in the article? Garrett Architectural History (talk) 02:12, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Garrett Architectural History: It might be best to ask the reviewer who declined it, OlifanofmrTennant. When declining a draft, a reviewer is presented with several different templated reasons, and it looks to me like the "informal tone" template was the closest thing to what was intended. In my view, the draft doesn't have an informal tone and doesn't have too much technical jargon. However, it has almost no resemblance to an encyclopedia article, lacking structure and organization, badly formatted citations, and various violations of Wikipedia:Manual of Style guidelines.

Try looking at similar articles; for example Wayne Lyman Morse United States Courthouse. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:55, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I left a comment one the draft OLI 05:08, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. Garrett Architectural History, your draft bears little resemblance to an actual encyclopedia article about Colonial American County Courthouse Architecture. The draft strays way off topic repeatedly into local administrative arrangements in England, the judicial processes of the Dutch, and fleeting references to Spanish and French colonial judicial buildings. You need to stick to the topic of courthouse architecture, with only brief additional content establishing context. Vast swathes of your draft are unreferenced, in violation of the core content policy Verifiability. The prose consistently raises questions about whether you are drawing your own conclusions, which is a violation of another core content policy, No original research. Wikipedia editors simply summarize what reliable published sources say about the topic, and we are not permitted to draw our own conclusions. Your draft is full of weak, tentative phrasing like "would have been" and "would have likely been" and "likely would have only contained" and "smaller colonial American counties might have had" and these formulations occur repeatedly. These phrases are considered weasel words and should be removed. Read MOS:WEASEL. Summarize reliable sources confidently and without equivocation. The formatting of the draft is completely non-standard, lacking a lead section, clearly delineated subsections, and a software generated table of contents. The software cannot generate a table of contents when the formatting departs so dramatically from what is typical of millions of Wikipedia articles. There is not a single wikilink in your draft. Instead of actually adding images, you have included external links to the records of the uploads of those images to Wikimedia Conmons. Your notes and your references are almost indistinguishable, are poorly formatted, and in most cases lack important bibliographic information. Not a single one includes a clickable link to an online source. In conclusion, your draft needs an awful lot of work. Cullen328 (talk) 07:11, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

There have been some mistakes made regarding some certain claims of copyright and so there are constant removal or restoration of information back and forth, so how can we protect Wikipedia pages from these issues? So how can we add semi-protection status to Wikipedia articles? DavidDunnymede (talk) 14:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

@daviddunnymede: requests for page protection are made at wikipedia:requests for page protection. ltbdl (talk) 14:15, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Is this a general question or about something specific? Are your concerns related to edits by checkuser blocked DantheWikipedian? --Onorem (talk) 16:02, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, because of disruption caused by editors like that and by some who revert whole pages just to remove copied work, end up reverting changes made by other editors. So it would be real mess to clean up and I suggest because of it, that we should add some form of protection for pages, so that only registered users could edit. DavidDunnymede (talk) 09:54, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

How to add a colour map in an article? I want to show Muktainagar taluka, a region with colour in Maharashtra. Tesla car owner (talk) 17:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

Is {{maplink}} what you want? Or do you want a pushpin map in the infobox like this:

Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1199
Coordinates: 20°56′N 76°02′E / 20.933°N 76.033°E / 20.933; 76.033

Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 22:04, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

No, I want highlight a Muktainagar taluka in Maharashtra's map and also want to add the map of the taluaka, like it present in "District census handbook Jalgaon" (see at PDF file ^[1]) but what to show road and palaces' name in it. Tesla car owner (talk) 10:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

{{maplink}} would be the thing for that then, but you'll probably need to create a wikidata item. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 12:22, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

my draft gets the same sources stated at different titles, how do it get them all into fit into one and not multiples of the same article? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Burning_Men# Veganpurplefox (talk) 09:58, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@veganpurplefox:

have the first instance of the reference "named".

like so:

<ref name="name">content</ref>

when you wish to use the reference again, use:

<ref name="name" />

note that each different reference needs a separate name. ltbdl (talk) 10:12, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

like this: < ref name="Burning Men BBC">Burning Men BBC</ref>< ref>"Burning Men: Road movie evokes 'atmospheric landscapes". BBC.</ref> for the first one? Veganpurplefox (talk) 10:18, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@veganpurplefox:

not quite. like this:

<ref name="Burning Men BBC">"Burning Men: Road movie evokes 'atmospheric landscapes". BBC.</ref>

ltbdl (talk) 10:47, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

thank you, its all fixed except for one that does this: Cite error: The named reference "Burning Men Deadline" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page). Cite error: The named reference "Burning Men Deadline" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page). Veganpurplefox (talk) 11:14, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox:  Fixed: you had defined the reference name in one place with a space before a period and in a different place without the space. If you want to re-use a named reference, just type <ref name="name"/>. You can do this in the VisualEditor – click the "Cite" button, then use the "re-use" tab to select the reference you defined before. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 12:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

thank you! Veganpurplefox (talk) 12:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I tried to address the banner questioning notability. Would appreciate if experienced editors could take a look and possibly clear the banner (or comment otherwise). I have no CoI with the subject of the article. Thank you. B030510 (talk) 08:54, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@B030510 I tidied up a couple of items and removed the tag. Well done for making the improvements to the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:00, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I believe that antigypsyism should be added to the list of central ideological features of the Nazi regime, along with the already-listed features of "racism, Nazi eugenics, anti-Slavism, and especially antisemitism". Gwendolyn Albert (talk) 13:15, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Gwendolyn Albert There is already an article on the Romani Holocaust which covers this pretty extensively. If you believe there should be reference to that in another article you could either make that edit yourself or suggest an edit on the Talk Page of the article you mean, including a relevant source citation. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:22, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I created an article titled Naulakha Temple, Deoghar about two months ago. Although the article seems to have been accepted and categorized as well, no editor has reviewed it yet. Usually, the articles I create take less than a week to get reviewed, but this one in particular has remained unreviewed for over two months now. Could someone please look into it? Thanks! Dissoxciate (talk) 07:57, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Dissoxciate: new page patrol has a very large backlog, it is simply taking longer than usual for some articles to be reviewed. Is there a particular reason why you're in a hurry? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:10, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @DoubleGrazing, no I'm not at all in a hurry, so apologies if I sounded that way. I just made an observation that it was taking longer for the article to get reviewed than usual. Dissoxciate (talk) 08:18, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Dissoxciate According to WP:NPP the oldest article not reviewed is currently 21 months old! It will have been indexed by search engines, though, as the cut-off for that is 90 days. There is also a large backlog of WP:AfC drafts of ca. 3900, although that has fallen recently. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I just saw the edit history of this page: Chalukya–Chola wars. This is an edit war, right? How do I report this? EpicAarush (talk) 15:08, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@EpicAarush I see nothing in the edit history that could be defined as an WP:EDITWAR. Can you specify what you think meets our definition? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:23, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull: Look at the edits between “Pirayone” and “CatTheMeow” between 29 November 2022 and 2 December 2023: 3 reverts in short time (admittedly not 24 hour span). You can see more revert conflicts also in there EpicAarush (talk) 15:44, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I didn't look at it, but that is so far in the past that there's no need to do anything now. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Thank you for replying! EpicAarush (talk) 15:58, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

hello, from what I added for the movie article, what could be extracted from sources I have added? Some sources has a lot of content but dont know what should be added and what should not be added into a Wikipedia article for movies. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Burning_Men# Veganpurplefox (talk) 02:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox: The content you have is a good start. If you can summarize what the reviews say, you'd have something that could be submitted for review. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:58, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Good ill try to do that! Veganpurplefox (talk) 09:06, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I think i put everything together but the times i was not able to read more because we need to be subscribed to view the content and was only able to seen the first paragraph before it let me unsee it Veganpurplefox (talk) 09:55, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

so I submitted it as I got everything added Veganpurplefox (talk) 17:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I noticed that they include towns, I would like to add the 10 Towns in New York that exceed 100k residents. AndrewSan12 (talk) 18:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, AndrewSan12. I see that you are already discussing this at Talk:List of United States cities by population. That is the best place to get input from other editors interested in that particular article. Cullen328 (talk) 18:35, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

okay, Thank you. AndrewSan12 (talk) 18:36, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm currently writing a draft for the newest The New York Times game Connections. There are multiple reliable sources I've found to make this article verifiable and notable. Would WP:SPS count here? If it did, would I be able to use articles from The New York Times as a source? Thanks, Tarantula^TM (speak with me) (my legacy) 18:11, 3 September 2023 (UTC).

Hello, TrademarkedTarantula. An article in the New York Times about one of their games is not an independent source, so is of no value in establishing the notability of the game. If you also have significant coverage in reliable, truly independent sources, then a NYT article can be used in limited ways. You can find some guidance at WP:ABOUTSELF. Cullen328 (talk) 18:41, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Should content that is based on links/references that can no longer be reached be deleted? Should archives like the Way Back machine be searched? Kronveldt (talk) 00:14, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Kronveldt: No (delete), and yes (search internet archive). If you can't find it, you can tag the ref with {{dead link}}, or add |url-status=dead if it's one of the citation templates. Mathglot (talk) 00:35, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

archive.today is also worth checking. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 00:48, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

I can point you to Help:Using the Wayback Machine for more details. Cwater1 (talk) 20:35, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Excuse me, I don't know if this is a good place to ask this question, but how do I add sections to Wikipedia articles? I tried finding out by myself, with the toolbar feature on my account, and I tried looking it up on the reference desk, but I couldn't find anything useful. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 00:52, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Triviatronic9000, welcome to the teahouse. Sections are created by creating their headings, as shown below.

== Section ==
=== Subsection ===
==== Sub-subsection ====

You can take a look at Help:Section for more information. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 01:48, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I have been improving the article, Wii U GamePad for the weekend, an attempt to possibly get this into GA status alongside the main article, Wii U. If anyone would like to copyedit the article or suggest improvements would be appreciated. Summerslam2022 (talk) 01:38, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Summerslam2022, hello and welcome to the teahouse. I suggest requesting a copyedit at WP:GOCE. The Guild maintains a Copy Edit Requests Page where editors can ask for copyedits on articles they are working to develop and improve or wish to nominate for Good Article, A-class, or Featured Article status. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 02:16, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I've already requested a copyedit, but i was asking for any improvements that could be made to this article. Summerslam2022 (talk) 02:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

At first glance, it seemed well-written without any obvious problems. I couldn't find any original research, and every sentence had a source to back it up. Plus, it maintained a neutral and balanced tone throughout. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 03:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Hm, alright. After it gets copyedited, I'll nominate the article for GA status. Thanks! Summerslam2022 (talk) 05:53, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

 2603:6081:85F0:71F0:275A:F715:DF75:2B66 (talk) 03:36, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Most of the religious organizations that have articles in Wikipedia have a criticism section. Why does the International Churches of Christ article not have a criticism section? Every time someone tries to enter criticisms or create a criticism page the edits are reverted and taken out. 2600:1700:4260:35D0:5142:ABEC:5B2D:D219 (talk) 20:45, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Courtesy link: International Churches of Christ. 331dot (talk) 20:56, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Someone with the same IP (maybe you?) are already discussing this at Talk:International_Churches_of_Christ, that is the place to discuss improvements to the article. If talk page discussions don't lead to consensus, read about next steps at WP:DR RudolfRed (talk) 21:01, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

(ec) "Tries to enter criticism" is putting it mildly, in looking at the edit history. The article will not be turned into a hit piece on this organization, please see neutral point of view. If you have independent reliable sources and are interested in summarizing them neutrally, please discuss this on the talk page. 331dot (talk) 21:03, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Criticism sections aren't always the best way to deal with negative coverage of a topic (see Wikipedia:Criticism#"Criticism" section), but thanks for flagging up this article, which would benefit from some attention from editors with experience of dealing with contentious topics and are in need of more independent sourcing. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:01, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Sverre T. Evensen: Please look at the top of this page. It says this is: A friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia, not a place to post your resume. Additionaly, please see WP:WWIN, especially the WP:PROMOTION section. --CiaPan (talk) 08:40, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Sverre T. Evensen(ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is not the place to create and submit a draft- that is done via Articles for Creation. However, more generally, Wikipedia is not a place to post your resume or tell the world about yourself. Please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources state about topics that meet our definition of notability, not what someone wants to say about themselves. 331dot (talk) 08:41, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I wrote East Khandesh (former district) article. When the article wasn't exist, many link related to East Khandesh was redirected to Jalgaon district, I want you to delete that rediect page and link all links of East Khandesh to East Khandesh (former district). Tesla car owner (talk) 09:19, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Tesla car owner. You can go to the redirect, and select "What links here", to see what links there are through the redirection. If there aren't many, you can edit them individually yourself. If there are more, you'll need a bot to do it. I suspect that this may be something that AWB can do for you (I've never used it, so I don't know); otherwise you can go to bot requests. ColinFine (talk) 10:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi all,

I wonder how can i choose to edit pages in one language only (ex. only in french or only in greek, etc)

TIA TheGreekEditor2023 (talk) 12:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TheGreekEditor, and welcome to the Teahouse of the English Wikipedia. If you want to edit pages in French, you need to go to the French Wikipedia, which is a separate project. If you want to edit pages in Greek, you need to go to the Greek Wikipedia, which is yet another project. ColinFine (talk) 12:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:David Wicht

Good Day

I was wondering if I could get help on my article about David Wicht. It keeps getting declined and there are multiple reliable sources about him and his role in the the South African film industry. I would like to speak to an editor about it because many other SA producers with much less clout than David have wikipedia pages so I am not sure why the article keeps getting rejected. Please help with some advice.

Kind Regards

Karin Karinvanderlaag (talk) 12:00, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Your userpage indicates that you are being paid by Wicht to write the article, so please don't expect help from us to do your job. Familiarize yourself with WP:PAID and the feedback already provided at the draft. Putting your three best sources forward would help, since at a glance the present ones don't seem valid. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 13:04, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Karin, and welcome to the Teahouse. Have you read your first article? or BACKWARDS? Nothing written or published by Wicht or FilmAfrika, or based on press releases or interviews, is relevant to getting the draft approved. And references like your #3, which doesn't even mention Wicht, serve no end at all.

As for the "producers with less clout", please see OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It may be that those articles are written more conformant with Wikipedia's policies; or it may be that they ought to be rewritten or deleted but nobody's got round to it yet.

The way you refer to them suggests that you, like many people, have the misconception that a Wikipedia article is in some way for the benefit of its subject. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, it is not, in any degree whatever. Of course the subjects of many articles get some benefit from the existence of the article (and some definitely do not). But that is incidental, and no part of Wikipedia's purpose. See WP:PROUD. ColinFine (talk) 13:10, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure if this is the right place but I would really like to know if there's some function to thank reviewers for reviewing articles beyond posting on their talk page, which could potentially be seen as annoying and/or time-consuming for the reviewer if they are busy. It strikes me as odd that there's such an easy way to thank people who make edits to a page on the watchlist but not for those who carry out the important review function, who probably have to wade through a lot of stuff. Is there a function I am missing, and if not can we please have one? =) BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 11:21, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@BoomboxTestarossa Assuming you mean reviewers who have accepted WP:AfC drafts, there will always be an edit in the history where the draft was moved to mainspace as the reviewer accepted it. In a recent example, you can see that on 2 September and that's an edit that can be "thanked" in the usual way. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I was updating the Akiachak, Alaska article and noticed that the aforementioned website had quite useful information about the 2020 census data for Akiachak. However, the interface and the amount of ads on the website are off putting, which makes me wonder if it is a deprecated or otherwise untrustworthy source. Figured this was a good place to ask if I should cite it. Thanks in advance. Slamforeman (talk) 04:15, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Slamforeman, much the better place to ask is WP:RSN. (The question has already been raised there, but got no response.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:04, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the redirect! I will ask my question over there instead. Slamforeman (talk) 15:02, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

hi, I was wondering how I can add actors in a TV series (Will tnt series) for the Cast paragraph. I tried but it keeps getting removed and seen it a promotion while there's proof on the rotten tomatoes and tv guide Veganpurplefox (talk) 21:03, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox: hello and welcome to the teahouse. I suggest that you bring this issue up at the talk page of the TV series you're working on. I do not know TV series very well.

Also, please be mindful about WP:Reliable Sources. I am not sure if Rotten Tomatoes counts as a reliable source–someone please chip in. TheLonelyPather (talk) 22:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Okay thank you, rotten tomatoes appears green and reliable on this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#perennial_sources Veganpurplefox (talk) 22:28, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox: It seems like you are reading that entry wrong. It reports - There is consensus that Rotten Tomatoes should not be used for biographical information,... - and that should be considered to include info like appearance in cast lists. I urge you to look for better sources. Even a recap site would be better if it mentions the actor by name, but a more regular review of the episode that talks about the actor's contribution would be best. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:47, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

but it's not a biography, he is in the cast list. And there's also recap referring him Veganpurplefox (talk) 01:51, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I didn't read it wrong Veganpurplefox (talk) 01:52, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

On an other language of his there was this article that mentions him too https://naekranie.pl/osoby/edward-hayter and appears in more than just these that I wrote Veganpurplefox (talk) 02:49, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

it was a Wikipedia reliable reference in an other language Veganpurplefox (talk) 02:50, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Veganpurplefox, other-language Wikipedias are separate projects independent from this English-language Wikipedia. They each determine their own standards of reference reliability, often different from en.Wikipedia, which is often said to have the most stringent standards. That an o-l Wikipedia accepts a source is no guarantee that en.Wikipedia will do so (although it might, and references here don't have to be in English).

Biographical information is any information pertaining to a person's life, including whether (or not) they acted in a particular film: it doesn't have to be in an actual biographical article. Wikipedia is particularly strict about it when the person concerned is still alive. See WP:BLP. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.194.81.165 (talk) 13:45, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Whats the difference from an alive person and a dead one? And why is english more strick than other languages? Veganpurplefox (talk) 13:53, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

One difference is how unsourced or improperly sourced statements are handled. For a living person, the response is most likely going to be removal of the statement. In other cases, it's a judgement call. Perhaps all that is needed is a {{citation needed}} tag. In either case, of course, if a suitable source is found using that source is the preferred solution. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox In most jurisdictions, you cannot libel a dead person, only a living one. English Wikipedia has been caught out in the past by hoax articles about living people, e.g. the Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident. This WMF page suggests that standards across all Wikis should be similar on biographies of living people. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:23, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I am a new Wikipedia Writer/Editor and my first article draft requires some serious edits before moving to the mainspace. I understand about making the language more formal and neutral, will work now on that. However, I need to clarify some details about references. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dr._Tharupathi_Munasinghe This is the article.I included some pdf, journal articles, newspaper articles, youtube links as references. Some of them had client's academic and career information published by his universities as a scholar. I also included some websites containing client's work. Can you please let me know what I had done wrong?

Also, my reviewer had stated :

Comment: Pretty much needs to be entirely rewritten. Sources are needed for the unsourced bits. Please remove external links from the body, and cut down on some of the works. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 17:22, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

1. Should I remove all external links?
2. Which work do you sugget I better cut down?

BizChrome (talk) 11:14, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, BizChrome, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that the experience you are having is fairly standard for people who try to create an article as the first thing they do editing Wikipedia. So my advice would be to put Munasinghe aside entirely for a few weeks or even months, while you learn how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our existing articles that interest you.

But when you do continue with the draft, the thing you need to understand is that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Essentially nothing written or published by him or his university will help your draft to be accepted.

You need to start by finding independent source that talk about him in some depth. That should be your very first step, long before actually writing any text, because if you can't find any, you'll know that he does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and not to spend any more time on it. If you find some, then you will need to forget everything you know about him, and write a summary of what those independent sources say. That is probably why the reviewer said "Pretty much needs to be entirely rewritten". Please see BACKWARDS. ColinFine (talk) 12:06, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine, now I get what you explained. Sure, I will spend more time to explore within. I am actually glad my first try went wrong, as I am learning a lot. Thank you again and will refer to Teahouse for futher inquiries. BizChrome (talk) 13:40, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Slight addition to User:ColinFine's excellent reply, you can use information from their personal websites/blogs/whatever under certain criteria (See WP:BLPSELFPUB), but, as Colin mentioned, it does not count towards notability. There's also a promotional tone that needs to be cleaned up, and watch for WP:PEACOCK words. (ex. "prominent", "skilled", "nuture", etc.) ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 18:22, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Link: Draft:Self-Assessment Manikin

I'm looking to add a photo of the scale to the page but I can't find a concrete copyright license to the picture. Sources from academic journals should be under free-use,.but I know Wikipedia doesn't allow free-use content in general, so I'm not sure how to go about it.

Any other advice on improving the article would also be appreciated, thanks! 267 08:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Twosixtyseven: the first sentence of the draft refers, ungrammatically, to "a stimuli". It says that the subject is an "assessment technique", but does not make clear what's being assessed, or who might be doing the assessment, or why. It does go into the details of the technique, but that's not much use to the general reader, who won't know what the technique is for. Maproom (talk) 07:44, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! I edited that section a little, is it any more clear now? 267 08:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that's much better! Maproom (talk) 09:56, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Twosixtyseven, if by "Sources from academic journals should be under free-use" you mean "Material in academic journals is conventionally ('all rights reserved') copyright, and therefore can only be reused within Wikipedia via a claim of 'fair use'", then I understand. However, this wouldn't be true: some academic journals are copyleft. -- Hoary (talk) 08:07, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the first part is what I mean, but I'm not sure if I totally understand your second sentence (to be honest, I'm not sure I understand what copyleft means). Do you mean that some journals do allow distributing materials even without fair use, and if so, do you have any advice as to how to go about finding this information? 267 08:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I'll try to answer you (after a break for dinner); but first, are you Heyu929 or are you Twosixtyseven? However well-intentioned, signing yourself [[User:Heyu929|267]] is a sure-fire way to confuse and irritate the people you're dealing with. -- Hoary (talk) 09:08, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Heyu929 or Twosixtyseven, when you and I write here, we are copyrighting what we write under the the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0. This is a flavor of copyleft, which in turn is a flavor of copyright. Now, when looking for material outside Wikipedia for potential repurposing within Wikipedia, unless we have an excellent reason not to do so we assume conventional copyright. Conventional copyright may be asserted by the copyright holder, but failure to assert it doesn't mean it doesn't hold. If it is asserted, the assertion may or may not be accompanied by the formula "All rights reserved". If this does appear, all rights are reserved by the copyright holder; if it doesn't appear, then we should assume that all rights are reserved by the copyright holder unless we have an excellent reason not to do so. Now, the vast majority of recently published academic articles and books are conventionally copyright ("All rights reserved"). However, some are not. Consider the Language Science Press, which says: "All our books are published under the CC-BY license. In exceptional cases, we have published books under the CC-BY-SA and the CC-BY-ND license." Material copyright with a CC-BY or CC-BY-SA license can be used for Wikipedia, provided that whoever uploads it to Wikimedia Commons scrupulously provides copyright-related information. ¶ Now, what's your signature? -- Hoary (talk) 11:49, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Heyu929 Your source doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148037 has an explicit copyright statement saying that the article is CC BY 4.0, "which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited" and is absolutely OK for Commons, where you will provide the URL from which you obtained the diagram(s) you wish to use. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:55, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary Thanks, that's really great information and I'll keep that in mind for the future. As for the signature, I changed my username a while back (privacy issues) and didn't realise the signature doesn't change along with it! Edited it now, sorry for the confusion! 267 03:25, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thanks for going so in-depth into the article! 267 03:28, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi everyone!

I need your help. I'm considering creating a page about Celeris Therapeutics GmbH. To ensure I have the right sources, I was wondering if you could verify these sources for me:

• https://www.trendingtopics.eu/celeris-therapeutics-einstieg-von-apex-ventures-leitet-grosse-seed-runde-ein/
• https://www.trendingtopics.eu/celeris-finanzierungsrunde-2022/
• https://brutkasten.com/artikel/celeris-foerderung-aws
• https://www.inibio.eu/inibiotech-fund-invests-eur1million-in-celeris-therapeutics
• https://www.bmaw.gv.at/Presse/Archiv/2022/Oktober-2022/EIC-Accelerator.html
• https://www.ots.at/presseaussendung/OTS_20221019_OTS0038/vier-oesterreichische-unternehmen-erhalten-wichtige-europaeische-innovations-foerderung
• https://app.dealroom.co/companies/celeris_therapeutics
• https://www.ffg.at/news/eic-accelerator-von-horizon-europe-26-mio-euro-fuer-hochinnovative-start-ups
• https://www.kleinezeitung.at/wirtschaft/6206042/20-Millionen-Euro-Kapital_Steirisches-Startup-Celeris-sagt
• https://www.aws.at/service/cases/gefoerderte-projekte-auswahl/deeptech/seedfinancing/2021/celeris-therapeutics/
• https://www.eif.org/what_we_do/equity/Case_studies/celeris-austria.htm
• https://eic.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-10/Seleceted%20companies%20-%20EIC%20Accelerator%2015%20June%20cut-off%20corrected.pdf
• https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/startups/celeristx-drug-discovery-for-incurable-diseases-with-ml-on-aws/
• https://biotechaustria.org/en/verband/
• https://www.sfg.at/innovationspreis-steiermark/wirtschaftspreis-des-landes-steiermark-sieger/
• https://transkript.de/start-up-der-woche/start-up-der-woche-detail.html?tx_news_pi1%5Bnews%5D=8340&cHash=222b7bcb8d240a38ce2200ce5444b067

I hope this isn't too much to ask. By the way, I've found a similar article about the Austrian Centre of Industrial Biotechnology. It has only three references, including a dead link, but it has been active since 2020. I'm wondering if creating a page about Celeris would have a chance of approval. I hope someone can provide some insights here. Thank you.Laurenceuuu (talk) 13:58, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Laurenceuuu It is too much to ask. Use WP:YFA to draft an article, including what you consider important, properly formated references, per standards described at WP:42. David notMD (talk) 14:12, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Laurenceuuu Are any of these sources something other than routine attempts at getting funding and doing what start-ups usually do? Articles on companies have to meet WP:NCORP guidelines, which this company might do if we can be convinced it will "design drugs for incurable diseases", as one source claims, rather optimistically given that if a disease really is incurable, drugs won't help! Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:59, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Given that the company was founded in 2020 and has fewer than 25 employees and no products, my opinion is that WP:TOOSOON is relevant. David notMD (talk) 15:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't think those sources will pass Wikipedia's threshold for notability, Laurenceuuu. If you want to narrow it down to your three best sources, I can explain what the issues are. And as David points out, the company is fairly new. Perhaps they will get more secondary coverage in the future. Regards, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 03:52, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Good day room,

Is reference from Baidu Baike accepted as Wikipedia citation?

What if a historical place exists but there isn't enough reference available? Is it possible to publish an article about that place?

Thanks. Sultanularefeen (talk) 07:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Sultanularefeen. Although there are major differences in how Baidu Baike and Wikipedia are operated, both projects are based on user generated content. Therefore, a Baidu Baike article is not acceptable as a reliable source on Wikipedia. Similarly, one Wikipedia article cannot be used as a reliable source for another Wikipedia article. In both cases, such an article may lead you to actually reliable sources if they are cited.

Coverage of historical places requires references to reliable sources. Otherwise, unethical people could just fabricate hoax articles about supposed historical places. Cullen328 (talk) 07:24, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks for your information Cullen328. Sultanularefeen (talk) 09:26, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Sultanularefeen, please don't ask the same question in different places. I have gone to the trouble of answering your question on my user talk page, and now I find you asked the exact same question here. ColinFine (talk) 16:19, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328, I posted the question in Teahouse with the hope that I might get the answers from several Wikipedians. Sultanularefeen (talk) 05:32, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I have taken a few pics of Sidney Sussex College (Cambridge) from my iPhone however, I just can not seem to upload them and continue to get error message; even though these are my pics. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks, Sahib Warne23 (talk) 00:05, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Warne23, you should be uploading them to Commons, not here. And then if you have a problem, you should ask about it at Commons, not here, Still, as you've started here, you could say here exactly what the error message at Commons was/is. (Without knowing what the message was, it's impossible to give advice.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:48, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary I am just following the Wikipedia guidance for the new editors - “Teahouse – Ask basic questions about using or editing Wikipedia. “

appreciate you trying to help , here’s the error message - “ An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive, and it has been disallowed. If this edit is constructive, please report this error.”

Thanks! Warne23 (talk) 03:31, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Warne23, you're doing things right. It's not uncommon to ask a question here and then get pointed to a better place to ask. You'll get quick answers here, but sometimes it is better to go where people are more experienced or the question is most relevant.

Are you getting that "automated filter" message trying to upload the image on Wikipedia or at Wikimedia Commons? The help page for the Commons is here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Help_desk You should be able to log in with your Wikipedia username and click the blue "Ask your question" button. Answers may come a little slower over there. One last note, is that you will need to choose a free content license for uploads to the Commons. Good luck, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 03:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Rjjiii Warne23 (talk) 04:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Warne23, that's a reasonable criticism of my response. It would have been better if I'd written something like "it would be better if you uploaded them to Commons, rather than here". Sorry about that. Wording aside, I stand by the substance. If you ask at commons:Commons:Help desk then your question is likely to be read by people who know the kind of thing that leads the relevant algorithm to conclude "potentially unconstructive". (If you're new to Commons, you'll have to log in there. Do so under the username Warne23 and with whatever password you use for this here. Signing up then won't be needed, and confusion will be avoided.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I'm currently writing an article on the Princeton Slavist Charles E. Townsend. Since there is already an article for another Charles E. Townsend, a US lawyer and politican, I need to choose an alternative title. Do I:
1) Leave the first Charles E. Townsend as is; use the full middle name in new article title.
2) Leave the first Charles E. Townsend as is; use a descriptive title like Charles E. Townsend (linguist) for the new article title.
2) Rename both to include the full middle names: Charles Elroy Townsend for the politican (already exists as a redirect) vs Charles Edward Townsend for the Slavicist?
3) Rename both to a descriptive title (e.g. Charles E. Townsend (politician) vs Charles E. Townsend (linguist)). This seems to be mainly what has been done for other similar articles at the Charles Townsend disambiguation page.

Option 1 and 2 seem inconsistent. Option 3 and 4 involve fixing all the redirects. Is there a quick way to do that? Helrasincke (talk) 09:15, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Helrasincke, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer depends on whether one of them is the primary topic, and if so which. Please see WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. ColinFine (talk) 09:34, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Helrasincke, if you do determine that politician Charles is not the primary topic, and need to change hundreds of incoming links to a disambiguated title, you can request an AutoWikiBrowser run, and someone with the appropriate permissions will be able to perform the task with an amount of automation. Folly Mox (talk) 12:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

In some countries, Zack Snyder's Justice League was released in cinemas and this is the poster with billing block. Please ,upload it in the page.[6]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_u8_fQTldgAB8OcoCtczDoJNFc_s0AgE/view?usp=sharing 190.21.184.246 (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. There is already a B&W version of that poster uploaded as WP:NONFREE content for the article. There is no need for your version and you may well be infringing the copyright just by sharing a link to it as you did here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

You can suggest this at Talk:Zack Snyder's Justice League. The suggestion will probably be rejected, for the reason given by Mike Turnbull. (Perhaps relevantly, this article seems to already have a rich history of junk edits.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Please I created an article innovation Support Network and it was marked for speedy deletion,can I revised to the older version to remove infringement Akwugo (talk) 11:37, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Akwugo I assume it was deleted for either copyright infringement or for being too promotional. You can't get it back if the former but if the latter the process at WP:REFUND may be used. However, I would advise you to start again after reading WP:BACKWARD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:41, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for posting twice,I was tensed and thanks for the response,it has not been deleted though Akwugo (talk) 12:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Akwugo You'll need to go immediately to the Innovation Support Network and copy out the source code to save it on your own computer, since speedy deletion can happen very quickly! Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:20, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

The SD was for copyright infringement, so expect it to disappear very soon, despite your efforts to remove what you have tentatively identified as the infringement problem. Your recourse is to start over, paraphrasing content from your references versus copy/paste. David notMD (talk) 12:28, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I am on it right now, thanks so much for your kind Responses Akwugo (talk) 12:29, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Why are votes used in Arbitration Committee elections? Looking at their history page, it seems that the elections have always been conducted via voting. Is there a reason why we don't have WP:RFA style elections instead? Ca ^{talk to me!} 10:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I assume that it is because we actually want ArbCom members and so have to choose from among the candidates. The community already has admins and could in principle go on refusing to add any new editor who was nominated, especially since occasionally a few "no" comments can sway the outcome. Incidentally, if you wish to suggest changes to how the next ArbCom election is run, you can do so by making a proposal at the RfC at WP:ACERFC2023 Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:33, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Ca, Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Proposals#Closed: 8B Admin elections is the most recent discussion about ballot-style RfA, if you're interested in seeing why it didn't reach consensus. Folly Mox (talk) 12:17, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I just realised I read your question in reverse, and Mike Turnbull had supplied the entire answer. Apologies for the confusion. Folly Mox (talk) 12:33, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I recently came across Kerala Super League and decided to PROD it. I did it with Twinkle. But looks like the talk page of Talk:Kerala Super League seems to be redirected to Talk:KCA President's Cup T20 and twinkle has placed the {{Old prod}} tag on the talk page of KCA President's Cup T20. Should I proceed to remove the {{Old prod}} tag from the talk page of KCA President's Cup T20? And how do I place it on Talk:Kerala Super League? Thanks <3 Jeraxmoira (talk) 09:22, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Jeraxmoira, more experienced editors are welcome to correct me, but I don't think {{Old prod}} is ever supposed to be removed. Given that Talk:Kerala Super League still redirects to Talk:KCA President's Cup T20 and you believe Kerala Super League is suitable for proposed deletion, a reasonable course of action might be just to turn it back into a redirect to KCA President's Cup T20, since a redirect would probably still be appropriate at the title even if the content isn't. Folly Mox (talk) 12:30, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

If you decide to continue with the PROD process, you should remove the old prod from Talk:KCA President's Cup T20 and replace the REDIRECT wikitext at Talk:Kerala Super League with the old prod template. You could also go with a blank and redirect per Folly Mox. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:40, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I just checked the edit history and it almost only has sock user actions throughout. I'll just go with the PROD process, remove the redirect and replace it with {{Old prod}}. Feel free to make a redirect if anyone thinks otherwise. Thanks for the help Folly Mox, Firefangledfeathers <3 Jeraxmoira (talk) 12:51, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Dear friends, I welcome your advice. I run a nonprofit that works with climate and environmental justice organizations. Many of the people we work with are national leaders, represented on federal committees and getting substantial media attention for their work. However, they often lack proper representation, e.g. on wikipedia, because they and their organizations may be poor and no-one is ensuring that their contribution to society is recognized. We would like to help them, but we also recognize that we may have a conflict of interest. They don't pay to become members of our organization, but we are paid by philanthropic foundations for our work with them. How should we approach this? Note - this question is more about dealing with conflicts of interest versus the nature of the information that we might share about them, although all thoughts and wisdom is welcomed. HarrietFest (talk) 13:14, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@HarrietFest Welcome to the Teahouse. There is a lot to go into here. You should do a lot of reading around Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Some of the key ones for you are how to handle your conflict of interest and that Wikipedia is not to be used for promotion. However, the good news is that if the people you want to write about are "getting substantial media attention" then you should have plenty of sources on which to base draft articles. The best sources are ones which meet all of these criteria: particularly that rules out things based on interviews and press releases. basic guidance as to the "how" is at WP:YFA and you should use the WP:AfC process to create drafts that will be looked at by experienced editors. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:29, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Terrific, thank you. HarrietFest (talk) 13:42, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, i was wondering if during the reviewing of the draft if reviewers will correct some things if not written well or if i can ask here if someone could read it and make changes if needed? Draft:Burning Men# Veganpurplefox (talk) 21:39, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Veganpurplefox Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I've fixed your link to a standard internal link so that everyone can read it in their preferred version of Wikipedia(mobile or desktop). Reviewers are able to edit drafts, but are under no obligation to; typically they give advice, as there are many drafts awaiting review and they don't have time to edit all of them. 331dot (talk) 21:50, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I see, thanks Veganpurplefox (talk) 21:54, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

The first sentence has a word missing, after "2019". Maproom (talk) 22:24, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

fixed it, thank you! Veganpurplefox (talk) 22:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Veganpurplefox, I suppose that by "Reccuring" you meant "Recurring"; but I don't know what you mean by "Recurring". And perhaps you instead meant something else. Also, what's "a person camera point of view"? -- Hoary (talk) 22:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Recurring means the characters that aren't main characters but appears a lot, is it the same thing as secondary characters? And a person camera point of view is a way that when filming they put a camera into the actors face so they can see what they see and it is moving like an actual person Veganpurplefox (talk) 22:38, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

here a video making the film that could expalin the point of view :https://twitter.com/BurningMenFilm/status/1142399638735138817?s=20 Veganpurplefox (talk) 22:41, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Veganpurplefox, for "the actors have a camera into their faces so viewers see what they see and the images are moving as if the actors really move", perhaps "the actor has a forward-pointing camera mounted on a helmet so viewers share their moving point of view"; although I'm pretty sure that editors more conversant with video than I am (and there are many such editors) will come up with wording that's far better. -- Hoary (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I will fix that Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:45, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

ah I see, I didn't know it was only 1 c and 2 r for recurring, so I'll fix the reccuring word. Does both words have different meaning? Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:04, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Veganpurplefox, you have a list of "Cast". This is divided into "Main" and "Recurring". I understand "main cast". I don't understand "recurring cast". (A simple solution might be removal of the subheaders "Main" and "Recurring".) -- Hoary (talk) 23:32, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

it is used in multiple tv series main and recurring so I'm not sure to understand what you don't understand? Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:41, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

For example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camelot_(TV_series) same as Will (TV series) Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I know even less about TV than I know about film, but I presume that in the context of a TV serial a "recurring" character is one whose appearance recurs in episode after episode. (This needn't be incompatible with "main". in The Virginian, James Drury and Doug McClure played major characters who appeared in episode after episode. They weren't "guest stars".) Burning Men isn't a serial, so there's no recurrence (or anyway there's no recurrence as I understand the word). -- Hoary (talk) 23:51, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Ah i see what you mean, i see the difference between the series and films, i thought it was written the same way, i will remove the main and recurring sections so its only into one Veganpurplefox (talk) 23:55, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

is the vague term on person point of view be removed now or I let it there till someone else either find something better for it? Veganpurplefox (talk) 00:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox: Our article for that filming technique is Point-of-view shot. Perhaps a perusal of the article will help you refine your wording. Deor (talk) 14:51, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, i worded it ,hope it isnt vague now, can i have comfirm so i can remove the vague? Veganpurplefox (talk) 14:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Is there a tool that can take an URL as my source and automatically output a html formatted reference in Wikipedia's style? rootsmusic (talk) 04:12, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello rootsmusic, yes, there are a few options. This is probably a good moment to ask as Headbomb recently did an article on the various automated options here: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2023-08-01/Tips and tricks Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 04:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Be sure to double check the output of the automated referencing tools if using a URL as input. The citations they create are always properly formatted but often incomplete, and sometimes only partially correct. Folly Mox (talk) 04:26, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rootsmusic, see Referencing at WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:13, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rootsmusic: WP:reFill will do that for you. Mathglot (talk) 08:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot Unless I misunderstand Wikipedia:ReFill's usage, it works on existing "bare URLs" in article references. My question is for use by contributors when adding a reference to an article. rootsmusic (talk) 16:27, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rootsmusic:, If you mean you want to add a fully formatted reference while only making one edit to the article. then you're right. Visual Editor can do that, but that ends up being more clicks than saving your bare url, and then invoking Refill. Plus, you can add many bareurls in your first edit, and on your second edit, Refill will fix all of them. That ends up with your name in the edit history twice, and if you don't want that for some reason, you'll have to use one of the other options. Mathglot (talk) 17:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Resolved

 – QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 18:20, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello!

This is not a Wikipedia specific question, but one of MediaWiki and CSS markup.

I want to redo my whole user page on Commons, so I made something on the Public Test Wiki, (not associated with Wikimedia) mostly because I have access to Special:ChangeContentModel on there. Here's the CSS for the page

Why is the heading not in a serif font? I set

.quokkaContent .mw-headline{
    /* ... */
	font-family: 'Georgia', serif !important;
}

and all the other properties for .quokkaContent .mw-headline are working properly, except for font-family. Why? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 12:44, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Since this is not about using Wikipedia, I suggest you repost this at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. While you are doing that, upload a screenshot and tell us what's wrong with it - it looks OK to me. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 13:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Verbarson: The problem is in the "About me" section header. It's supposed to look like this serif text, but it looks like the rest of the page with the sans-serif font, even though I set it to be serif. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 14:10, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Using Chrome, Edge and Firefox on Windows, and Chrome on Android, in every case the 'About me' is in a bold serif font that seems to be Times New Roman. The Firefox diagnostic (F12) suggests that the selection of Georgia is overridden by inheritance from h2. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 15:48, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Is it alright for users who are not administrators to use user warning templates? Specifically the ones regarding vandalism? Subariba (talk) 20:07, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Subariba: Yes, that is ok. RudolfRed (talk) 20:10, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Subariba Yes it is. However, they should know what "vandalism" does and doesn't mean: reading, understanding, and bearing in mind the two paragraphs starting "On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning" that appear near the top of Wikipedia:Vandalism. -- Hoary (talk) 21:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm struggling to embed infoboxes into one another. Rather than appear as a new section of the original infobox, which seems to be the desired layout, the secondary infobox shows up within a smaller frame, slightly off center to the right. Are there infoboxes that can't be embedded or accept embedded infoboxes? Thanks.

Redacwiki (talk) 17:45, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Redacwiki, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see WP:IEmbed. ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, i had my Draft:Burning Men image removed while there was rights to use it as you can see: https://twitter.com/JeremyWooding/status/1698762410499178600?s=20 Veganpurplefox (talk) 18:58, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox See WP:GID Subariba (talk) 19:35, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

so I could just add this to be okay with publishing:Attribution-ShareAlike

? Veganpurplefox (talk) 19:41, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Veganpurplefox: Not unless the photographer has explicitly stated that the photo is released under that license. Saying "cool, use what you want" isn't sufficient. The declaration needs to be more official than that, and sent to the Wikimedia Foundation; see WP:CONSENT for an example template. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

would this message work?: "I own the rights to my headshot images so can give you permission to use them - if we can credit Michael Shelford that would be great" Veganpurplefox (talk) 20:00, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

No. "Permission to use them" is not enough. See WP:DCM. ColinFine (talk) 21:53, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I see, I have reached out to her and explain what she needs to do and send the email to the wikimedia commons Veganpurplefox (talk) 21:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Why was my edit of the Wikipedia page "Irwin Sobel" (I am that Irwin Sobel) rejected when I attempted to correct a reference to "Gary Feldman" that was pointed at the wrong Gary Feldman. I also attempted unsuccessfully to create a Wikipedia Stub page for the correct Gary Feldman. Link to "Irwin Sobel" page in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irwin_Sobel

Since I tried again today to edit "my" Wikipedia page (by replacing the link to Gary Feldman to a non-link name: "Gary Michael Feldman, M.D.") and was blocked from "editing Wikipedia" from my cellphone (which was on a Google 1 VPN for security reasons) I am sending this from my "Fedora 38 Workstation". Can someone advise me how to get this mess fixed up? I'd like a reply specifically to this Visual Editor message. Thank you. Irwin (Edward) Sobel IrwinSobel (talk) 21:40, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I am puzzled. IrwinSobel, when you wrote the above, the article Irwin Sobel hadn't been edited since June ; and has never been edited by you. Some people might argue that you shouldn't edit an article about yourself, even when it's about such a clearcut issue; but I don't thing anyone would ban you for that. Maproom (talk) 21:58, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, IrwinSobel.

I have delinked Gary Feldman from the article about you. If it seems likely that he meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, so that there could be an article about him, that could be turned into a redlink, with a suitable disambiguator such as "Gary Feldman (mathematician)" or whatever expression is appropriate.

Please note that you are very strongly discouraged from making any edits at all to Irwin Sobel, but should instead make edit request on the talk page. ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine. I will follow your suggestion in the future. It was helpful. IrwinSobel (talk) 23:59, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I have retitled this thread more informatively, I hope not misleadingly.

This is complex. Here is an unexplained edit (of March '22) changing Gary Feldman to Jacob Cairncross. Here is your edit (of May '22) changing this back.

"Gary Michael Feldman, M.D.", however correct, is very odd as the title of an article. Start by dropping the "M.D.". If Feldman is less often referred to as "Gary Feldman" than as "Gary Michael Feldman" or "Gary M. Feldman", then one or other of the latter names can be used. Otherwise we normally use a very simple description: "Gary Feldman (architect)", "Gary Feldman (politician)" or whatever.

Imagining for a moment that he was/is an architect, then the best thing to do would be to create Draft:Gary Feldman (architect), submit this as a candidate article, and, when it's accepted, link instances of "Gary Feldman" to the new article.

Incidentally, to make the template on your user page work, add one more "}" to it. -- Hoary (talk) 22:05, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

• Note that it's now intended to delete and redirect Irwin Sobel anyway. See Talk:Sobel_operator#Merge_proposal Andy Dingley (talk) 22:53, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

How can we add custom preview Icons on television series posts.

For example, if I am viewing India's Got Talent (season 9) then at its bottom IGT 10 page shortcut link image is my concern. Harshvardhan 1427 (talk) 01:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Harshvardhan 1427, by "preview Icons" do you mean the image used in the search bar and popup/hover text when you hold your mouse over a link? That is created from the first freely licensed image in article automatically. Or do you mean something else? Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 03:41, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

When you scroll down to bottom of a page, whatever image you see in 3 articles, I am talking about that. Harshvardhan 1427 (talk) 00:22, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I desire to revisit the 1924 United States presidential election that I had worked on in the far past, and I can dig up plenty of information rather easily with key points, but I have not been effectively able to formulate that information into something proper for the article. Is there are place where I can find prospective writers for said article? In the past I would inquire WikiProject United States presidential elections, but that is largely dead now it seems; I've made a number of inquiries with other WikiProjects or Users, but I haven't had any luck finding a collaborator. While I could certainly continue to expand the database of newspaper sources I've linked to on its Talk Page, its getting harder to do so with no one making use of it. I'm not sure if there is any official place to ask for a collaborator on an article, at least beyond hoping someone picks up on the article's Talk Page, but I figured the Teahouse might have better ideas on where I could do so. Ariostos (talk) 02:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Beyond an article's talk page, Ariostos, or the talk page of a relevant "WikiProject" (if this isn't moribund or worse), there is no particular place to ask. I suggest that you make modest starts to improving the article 1924 United States presidential election yourself. As long as they cite reliable sources, represent these sources fairly, remain neutral, and don't add mere trivia [but let's forgo an unabridged list] and all in all clearly are improvements to an article, unpolished edits are welcome and are likely to be noticed and improved on by editors qualified to do so. -- Hoary (talk) 07:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Based on your OP, I'm guessing you've tried Wikipedia:WikiProject United States, Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics and Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics/American politics as well. "No luck" is unfortunately fairly common, millions of WP-articles and ten of thousands of active editors, with a broad definition of "active". Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:33, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Are there too many inline citations on this Wikipedia article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting 2A00:23C5:F405:2001:3CA3:859D:677B:BDBC (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Is there to many citations?

Are there too many inline citations on this Wikipedia article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting Are there too many inline citations in the "Sub-processes within fast carbon cycle" of this Wikipedia article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle Are there too many inline citations in this article? 2A00:23C5:F405:2001:3CA3:859D:677B:BDBC (talk) 17:07, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Comment consider the above comment by this IP, this feels like some LLM shenanigans. Googleguy007 (talk) 17:14, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm going to assume good faith and point out to the IP that we do have guidance on this at WP:OVERCITE. Suggestions to improve any article (such as by removing excess citations) can be made on its Talk Page, e.g. Talk:Carbon cycle. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP user and welcome to the teahouse. From the first glance, the first article is indeed suffering from Wikipedia:Citation overkill, especially in the second paragraph of the lede and the first two paragraphs of the "Forms" section.

However, the problem of citation overkill is less obvious in the second article you mentioned. I think it certainly happens in the "Types of dynamics" section.

That being said, I encourage you to bring these concerns up in the talk pages of these articles. Also, please be mindful to not post repeated questions at the teahouse. Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. I agree with the points. Should I remove some unnecessary citations or first bring up concerns in the talk page? sorry for repeating question, I just meant to add the second article.

Do I need to talk on talk page about edits or just be bold like it says?

What is LLM shenanigans?

Thanks! 2A00:23C5:F405:2001:3CA3:859D:677B:BDBC (talk) 17:32, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

See WP:LLM. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP address,

You are very welcome. I suggest that you bring up the concerns in the talk page first. Cluttered citations may be signs of an edit-war, and we sure do not wish to provoke another. Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 22:22, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I've added a section on the talk page. Let's see what happens now.

Thank you for your help. 2A00:23C5:F405:2001:B814:5B78:8694:748F (talk) 09:44, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I attempted to edit my work and saw a notice that the page was redirected. In simple language, what does this mean and how do I respond? What action did I do to result in this?

When I click on the greyed-out draft name, a dialogue box appears with the following options for Page settings

• Redirect this page to (selected) - why would I want this option?

• Prevent this redirect from being updated when target page is moved.

• Show the Table of Contents (Always, If needed, Never) - "If needed" is already selected - what is the consequence of accepting this?

• Disable the edit links next to each heading on this page.

• This is a disambiguation page

Sorry to be such a dunce about this! Co1umbus (talk) 23:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Which page were you looking at? If it's Carol A. Mullen then that's at Draft:Carol A. Mullen, because it's an as-yet unpublished draft. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Co1umbus, I see that in Draft:Carol A. Mullen all the citation links are fakes, the numbers in square brackets don't link to anything. You need to read Help:Referencing for beginners.   Maproom (talk) 07:04, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Co1umbus You started that draft on Mullen in your sandbox at User:Co1umbus/sandbox. When you moved it to draft space, the software left the redirect in its place. Assuming you wish to use your sandbox now for something else, you need to go and edit it to remove the redirect and replace it with anything else you like. This link will take you there. Use "edit" in the normal way to change what's currently in the sandbox. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

The person 68.67.244.157 (talk) 14:00, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP user and welcome to the teahouse. With all respect, Wikipedia:Do your own homework, please. Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 14:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

You can read about Robinson Crusoe and Defoe's possible sources for his character at Robinson Crusoe. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

How does one deal with an editor who keeps restoring their preferred version of content, which contradicts reliable sources, and refuses to provide any argumentation in support of their position? 93.72.49.123 (talk) 04:55, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

From what I can see of your particular dispute, they are not restoring a preferred version but rather simply enforcing the sanctions related to the Russo-Ukrainian war, under which non-extended-confirmed users may not edit in areas related to the topic, regardless of whether the edit is constructive. There is nothing you can do to continue making these changes, as they are simply not permitted. If you would like to edit in these areas in the future, consider creating an account so that you may eventually gain the required permissions. Tollens (talk) 05:25, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

"regardless of whether the edit is constructive" - what a joke. Guess P:CE readers would have to suck it up and leave away misinformed because some busybody wants to second-guess reliable sources and enforce pointless rules against common sense. After all, what do those retards at the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Reuters know? 93.72.49.123 (talk) 05:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

No opinion on the content, but your problem seems easy to fix. You could create an account and become extended-confirmed. Or, you could ask an extended-confirmed user to make the changes you wish to see. Pecopteris (talk) 05:42, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

IP editor, if you call anyone a "retard" again, even if it is joking or sarcastic, you will be blocked. I hope that's clear, and that you now understand that you are not permitted to edit in any way regarding the war between Russia and Ukraine. You know exactly how to gain that user right. Cullen328 (talk) 08:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Can one request an edit request? Wikipedia:Edit requests Cwater1 (talk) 15:10, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, there was a list somewhere that had every user who had made recently a certain amount of edits in different WikiProject areas - can anyone find this for me, or am I just not remembering things right? BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:27, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11 You may find WP:EDITS close to what you remembered. At the foot in the "See also" section there is a link to this page which is exactly what you are looking for but is currently defunct. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:17, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: I found what I meant here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory/Description/WikiProject National Football League - though it seems it hasn't been updated in 14 months? Is there a newer version of that available or did that stop altogether? BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:14, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11 I don't know. I suggest you ask at WT:NFL, which seems to be an active Talk page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:26, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I submitted the draft for review and it got deleted due to possible "unambiguous advertising" . Is there anything I can do to change this? What specifically can I change to get it approved? Andresusfedu (talk) 14:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Andresusfedu Firstly, welcome! Secondly could you provide a link to your draft? Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 14:10, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Of course, here you go Draft:Dr. John Cochran . Andresusfedu (talk) 14:16, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Andresusfedu:

Welcome to the teahouse. Right now, I see that the draft lists all the publications of this professor from 1985 to 2023. Please note that Wikipedia is not a database. Please see WP:What Wikipedia is not. I would say that a Wikipedia page gives people information about why the subject is notable. In most of the time, when it comes to a WP:Biography of a living person, prose is strongly needed.

Please also note that, by the manual of style, we do not include "Dr." in the title of articles. You can read more about it at WP:MOSWP:TITLESINTITLES.

Finally, I see that you're writing about a professor from the University of South Florida. With all due respect, your username suggests that you are from "usfedu", which can be interpreted as USF, the university of South Florida. If you have a WP:Conflict of interest, please declare it on your user page.

Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 14:28, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Andresusfedu Academics like Cochran need to meet the specific notability guidelines, which he may well do. However, as advised, Wikipedia articles don't just list publications (although they can mention his most important and cited ones): they show why he is notable. Suitable sources to demonstrate that include only those which meet these criteria. The draft must also meet the standards at biographies of living people, which means that every fact such as his education and awards must be supported by an inline citation. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:35, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I deleted >90%. Start over. David notMD (talk) 15:34, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Andresusfedu, the draft looks better after David's edit. Your next task will be establishing Notability. As a rule of thumb, you should look for at least three WP:INDEPENDENT, reliable, secondary sources with significant coverage about the person. Right now, you have none. Mathglot (talk) 16:24, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Please how do I protect a page from many editors and limit it to only contributors Daniel Ifeanyi Igwe (talk) 19:13, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Ngo Udeh Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Typically "editors" and "contributors" mean the same thing here on Wikipedia. I assume this relates to the article for which you declared a conflict of interest. Articles are not protected merely to limit contributions to those by certain people, or to protect the version of an article that one might prefer. Articles are protected to prevent disruption, such as vandalism or edit warring. If an article has a demonstratable problem with vandalism, edit warring, or other similar disruption, page protection may be requested at WP:RFPP. Typically the problem must be recurring and be unable to be stopped by lesser measures(like blocking individual editors). Are you having difficulty with that article? 331dot (talk) 19:23, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

This is in regards to Draft:Not This Part of the World. I cannot find more reviews for it and found out the director said it didn't receive much when the film released. Looking at WP:OEN to see what other options may be available, most of the coverage is from Boise State University and The Idaho Statesman. Most of the citations are significant and reliable, but some may not be independent.

• I have not been able to find non-trivial articles more than 5 years after its release.
• It has received an award, though I do not know if it is major.
• It seems to be substantially covered at BSU, or at least it was back when it came out.
• I found multiple sources saying it is the first full-length film made in the state of Idaho in ~70 years.
• It looks to be one of the first film roles for Matt Letscher, and Adam West was also cast for being a local to the area.

I think 1 to 3 bullets above may apply, but I am not certain about them. Would like more insight please. – Filmforme (talk) 19:53, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Filmforme: In my opinion, this looks notable, given the Statesman coverage. If I were you, I would move it to article-space at this point. If someone disagrees about its notability, they can take it to AfD and make their case. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:07, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Will do, thank you for your insight @Elli Filmforme (talk) 20:49, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Made this page but everywhere i look it says it is in santa monica but from what I see it looks outside the city limits and in the pacific palisades.. Anyone have any thoughts?

Giorgio Baldi Megalographery (talk) 21:07, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Megalographery, could you explain the "COI troller!" note you have as your userpage? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Megalographery, welcome to the Teahouse. If reliable sources say it's in Santa Monica, that's what the article should say. Is there confusion among the sources themselves? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:29, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Turns out it is sort of both.. It is officially Rustic Canyon in the City of LA but it is a Santa Monica zip and post office that covers that area.. Megalographery (talk) 21:36, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I am new editor of Wikipedia and I trying to edit in this article. Since is currently semi-protected indefinitely due to Vandalism, the article's talk page has also been semi-protected. I am here to recommend to edit anything in Wikipedia, in this IP address. Since I was blocked in several times and once the block expires, I want to make useful contributions. I noticed that CEO Sergey Brin and Larry Page created this company on September 4, 1998. If created an account, I recommended to read per WP:SOCK is to use one account and one preson, also read WP:USERNAME to choose in new username that keep I very happy and not abusing multiple accounts, I'm so excited to see that Wikipedia will continue forever to see what happens. Can anybody help me if I created account in the near futures and if just to edit useful contributions and don't delete your account and if in doubt, just abandoned and make new accounts per WP:ACCOUNT now? Also, please see WP:PAG, WP:WWIN, WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHIES and WP:BLOCKING. Thanks. 2402:800:63B0:4EBD:CEA:1784:B5BE:D337 (talk) 23:45, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

If you currently have an account that is blocked, you may not edit until the block is lifted. The block applies to you as a person and not just to one specfic account. Go to the talk page of the blocked account and there should be instructions there regarding your block. RudolfRed (talk) 01:23, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm sure I not blocked if I understand after reviewing Guide to appealing blocks. Also, I see there are over 1,174 billions edits in English Wikipedia, over 6,710 millions articles and 118,343 recent contributors with making 1 edits during last month. See Wikipedia:Wikipedians for more details and go to Help:Introduction to get started edit in English Wikipedia, that was not shutdown indefinitely. 2402:800:63B0:4EBD:CEA:1784:B5BE:D337 (talk) 03:03, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Here are the links here: [7] with a list of recent changes to Wikipedia. Thanks, 2402:800:63B0:4EBD:CEA:1784:B5BE:D337 (talk) 03:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

IP editor – if this is not just chatbot-generated nonsense, then I have to tell you that you are not making much sense. It is not clear what question you are asking, or even if you are asking a question at all. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.194.81.165 (talk) 13:27, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

IP editor, don't post nonsense such as this on the teahouse. I suspect you are using a chatbot like the previous editor suggested (repeating information just said, linking irrelevant policies, nonsensical sentences), and if you are, knock it off. If you are not using a chatbot, try rephrasing your questions so they are actually comprehensible. Industrial Insect (talk) 13:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Next time I don’t used nonsense anymore. And don’t using a chatbot for making unblock request. 2402:800:63A5:DAFF:C11B:5A70:16AC:BC63 (talk) 22:46, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

how can i check my sandbox article or page content is ok or not ok Wikiwriterforall (talk) 21:49, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Wikiwriterforall, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that your sandbox has no chance of being accepted as an article in its present form, as it has no reliable sources, and so does not establish that the school meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

Writing a new article is very very hard for new editors, and I always advise people to spend a few weeks or months making improvements to existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before they even try it.

But in any case, please read and study your first article, especially about notability and references. ColinFine (talk) 22:01, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

"established in 1982, towards the end of the twentieth century(1982)" reads like a parody of Dan Brown. Maproom (talk) 22:09, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Wikiwriterforall, the draft currently has one reference. This reference (at alchetron.com) itself has one reference: the (subsequently deleted) Wikipedia article Happy Palace Grammar School. Thus the draft would appear to be referenced, indirectly, by Wikipedia, which isn't acceptable. As for alchetron.com itself, we read: "Alchetron's free social encyclopedia allows users to search, share and interact with content on millions of topics." So it too isn't acceptable. -- Hoary (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I am Harvici. A student of St. Francis College. Since the last 2 to 3 days, user:The Herald has been reverting my edits on the page about St. Francis' College. As the college isn't that famous, no other respectable sources have verified its history. But the official website of the college (https://www.stfrancislucknow.com/) should be considered as an authorative figure in relation to the school as WP:RS states- reliable sources may be published materials with a reliable publication process, authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject, or both. Still user:The Herald isn't accepting and citing many other Wikipedia Guidelines (like:Wikipedia:Articles with a single source) Harvici (talk) 04:31, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@Harvici: The Herald was pretty clear in the first edit summary of a massive revert. I suggest you read the documents linked in that summary.

Wikipedia doesn't care what the subject of an article has to say about itself. We need reliable sources that are independent of the subject (that is, secondary sources). It is OK to cite the subject here and there, but when the bulk of the article becomes reliant on a primary source rather than a secondary source, it isn't useful, you may as well just go to the subject's web site. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I want to add a B-class evaluation to this talk page, but every time I add the code, I keep getting the same preview warning and it doesn't show up. I've tried copying the code from other article talk pages, but it still doesn't work. Tarantula^TM (speak with me) (my legacy) 04:52, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTarantula: Unless I misunderstand, it looks like you added b1, b2, and a bunch of other paramaters that the template does not recognize. See {{WikiProject Video games}} for how to use the template. RudolfRed (talk) 05:03, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

phonak va widex

NormanNellyOurDogs (talk) 05:41, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

hi @NormanNellyOurDogs and welcome to the Teahouse! do you have a question regarding Wikipedia? 💜  melecie  talk - 05:45, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, NormanNellyOurDogs, and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, we can't help you compare hearing aids, and we do not compile lists of their features in any articles either. You may want to use a search engine to look for other websites which may have already made a comparison between the two. Tollens (talk) 05:46, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Can any action be taken to Wikipedia vandals, other than simply blocking them from editing? Can any more severe punishments be taken, or can legal action be taken? 2A00:23C5:F405:2001:E111:64EB:E6CA:BB52 (talk) 14:24, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Against WP:LTA there can be taken some action, such as complaining to their internet provider (if known), or even harsher measures. But a user or IP which vandalizes once or twice is not prosecuted. tgeorgescu (talk) 14:29, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

There are towns with only one or two good internet providers, so getting blacklisted as customer is a serious inconvenience. tgeorgescu (talk) 14:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

In principle, since edits are attributed to those who made them, an editor could be sued for libel, for example by a company or a living person that they targetted. I'm not aware of such a case but would urge you not to test this out! Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:39, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi tgeorgescu and Mike Turnbull, thanks for your fast response. That's very interesting, I didn't know that ISPs would consider Wikipedia vandalisms an offence. Upon their knowledge of the vandal, what does getting blacklisted as a customer involve? Blocking access to the website? (By the way, this is pure inquiry, I don't have any plans! 😆) 2A00:23C5:F405:2001:E111:64EB:E6CA:BB52 (talk) 14:51, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I don't know of any ISP who has ever taken action against a Wikipedia vandal. Same goes for schools; we get vandalism from schools all the time, and those IP addresses tend to get long-term blocks so nobody can edit Wikipedia from those addresses. We have blacklisted ISPs also; this is just an inconvenience for the customer and doesn't affect the ISP. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:34, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I thought vandalism on Wikipedia wasn't a crime. Posting content that is illegal under US law can obliviously get that person responsible for doing so in legal trouble. Cwater1 (talk) 15:15, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

A lot of things which are not crimes could produce trouble for someone doing those things. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

• Of course not. If you're taken in the night and held in detention on an island indefinitely without access to the outside world, you haven't technically committed any crimes, because you were never taken to court. GMG^talk 18:57, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi.

I see there is no Kyell Gold article, neither Tim Susman one. I am sure that once upon a time there was such an article. Might I ask why it is so? And I would like to "redo" the article, if only such a thing would be possible?

Best wishes. --Kaworu1992 (talk) 07:29, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. An article about Kyell Gold was deleted in March of 2022 per the result of this deletion discussion. If you are able to address the concerns that led to deletion, you can create and submit a draft artice via Articles for Creation. 331dot (talk) 08:17, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Kaworu1992, there doesn't seem ever to have been an article titled "Tim Susman" or "Timothy Susman". -- Hoary (talk) 08:40, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Kaworu1992. There could be an article on Tim Susman, if:

(a) Several reliable sources have, independently of any direct or indirect influence by him, published a substantial amount of material about him (not just his books) that explains how he is important (meaning that in Wikipedia jargon, he is "Notable"); and

(b) Someone puts in the considerable work of finding those sources and summarising them in a (preferably Draft) article with appropriate citations to the sources.

No one directly connected to Susman should do this. From a cursory web search, it looks to me as if there is not (yet) enough reliably published about him to justify an article, even though he potentially seems to be an interesting person even apart from his Young Adult fantasy fiction. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.194.81.165 (talk) 11:32, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I came across a page here that was written by a person who works there - so a clear COI. They didn't declare anything. But the page isn't promotional. It was created in November 2021 by AFC. Nothing to see here? Just ignore it? Or should some action be taken? If so, what. Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 06:36, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Which article? David notMD (talk) 07:55, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

If you want me to name them I will but I was thinking I should be discrete. Or is there no need to do so? Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 08:04, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Whitemancanjump23. There's a difference between an "undisclosed COI" and "undeclared paid editing", with the latter being a violation of the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. While users are strongly encourage to be as transparent about any conflict of interest they may have with respect to content they're creating or editing on Wikipedia and COI editing is highly discouraged, it's not prohbitted per se and disclosing such a thing isn't mandatory. WP:COI is a guideline and COI editors are highly encouraged to follow it because it can help them avoid running into problems, but it's not policy in the sense that compliance is mandatory. Undeclared paid editing, however, is (as previously stated) a serious violation of Wikipedia policy and paid editors are required to make a proper disclosure per WP:PAID. If you just suspect this to be a case of simple COI in which the user in question is acting in good faith and is not otherwise violating any other Wikipedia policy, then you can (if you want) just leave them be or at most may be suggest that they declare their COI by posting something on their user talk page. If, however, you feel this person is somehow violating Wikipedia policy in some serious way, you could post something at WP:ANI or try email per WP:PAID#Reporting undisclosed paid editors. What you want to avoid doing is to start trying to connect the dots between someone's Wikipedia identity and their real world identity as explained in WP:OUTING. You can provide the names of articles that you think might be impacted by this non-disclosure and even the user names of those who are involved, but you shouldn't reveal anything more than the other person has already revealed themselves through their Wikipedia edits. It's best to use email personally identifying information unless the user has posted it themselves somewhere on Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:22, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly The editor in question did 11 random edits and then created the page via AFC. They haven't edited any other page since, including this one. They work for the company in question but I think this is undisclosed COI as opposed to UPE. But like I said, I don't think the page is problematic. What I'm thinking is to just let it be but keep a page on the editor's activity and edits to the page. If I see anything untoward, I will flag it. Ok? Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 08:30, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

If they work for the company, they are a paid editor. There doesn't need to be specific payment for edits. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Ok they're a paid editor. How should I proceed? Do you want me to email you the name of the page? Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 08:41, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

You may if you don't wish to publicly reveal that it was you who came across it. You may also email via the address given on the page provided by Marchjuly above if you want to be more general about it. 331dot (talk) 08:45, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

I prefer to email MarchJuly or yourself about it as you have some context and then I will leave it in your hands. If you decide to do nothing, I'm ok with that.How do I email one of you? I couldn't see an address. Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 08:49, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Whitemancanjump23, both editors have the "Email this user" function enabled on their user pages. I suggest that you use the desktop site in case you are using an app or the mobile site, which lacks full functionality. Cullen328 (talk) 08:56, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I was looking for that but in the wrong place. Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 08:59, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Whitemancanjump23 and Cullen328: You may also go to the special page Special:EmailUser and input the recipient user name there. Then the form opens, where you type your message. You may also go directly to the form through Special:EmailUser/Username CiaPan (talk) 09:07, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Whitemancanjump23 (talk) 09:12, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Whitemancanjump23: I'm not a Wikipedia administrator so emailing me will not resolve things and I won't respond to your email. 331dot and Cullen328 are Wikipedia administrators, however. Even so, I still suggest you email the address listed on WP:PAID since that's what it's for. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:17, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Can I suggest that it's sometimes worth viewing this from the reader's perspective? If an employee of a university edits the article about their university to correct an out-of-date department name or something like that, technically it's undisclosed paid editing, but they probably didn't even think of it as such, but it's actually beneficial to Wikipedia, useful to our readers, and likely correct. If we wade in and revert it on principle, we make things worse. Basically I'd suggest fighting UPE (and COI) ferociously when it's used to create promotional and rubbish articles and distort the balance on contentious subjects, but where it's quietly doing the job that the unpaid editors would have done, if only they'd known, I'd leave it. So it depends on the edit... Elemimele (talk) 12:31, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I think it depends. A one-off edit fixing or updating something might not even be noticed as UPE. Sustained involvement, though, needs some sort of response- not necessarily immediate indef blocking, but encouragement to comply. 331dot (talk) 12:37, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Mr.P.NAVEENKUMAR was born to the parents of Mr.Periyannan and  Mrs.Amsaveni. His father is a physically challenged while his mother is a victim of intense Rheumatoid Arthritis.  He was solely brought up by his grandmother. He as a child growing up in such an environment, the only prominent thing in his mind was fear and pain. Seeing all this, he had a burning desire to become a doctor and eventually cure his parents. But these hopes came crashing one day when he ultimately realized that school education itself was a luxury. So, in an attempt to manage his finances, he would go to the fields in the morning and work for 4 Rupees. It helped him to get his own snacks. Evenings were more pitiful, for he had to clean cow dung for money, in the small 2-hour window between his school and tuition. Considering these circumstances this young man studied hard, completed his engineering and shined as a topper. Atchayampage (talk) 07:37, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Atchayampage Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This content is completely unsuitable for Wikipedia, which is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources say about topics that meet our criteria for inclusion. 331dot (talk) 08:15, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Atchayampage and welcome to the Teahouse.

Could you provide the source for this? 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 08:18, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

The writing style suggests to me that the text is about its author, who is treating this as a social media style website. It would be interesting to see the source for the claim that this person cleaned cow dung for money. 331dot (talk) 08:20, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@331dot See Cow dung#Uses for some general sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:34, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:ATCHAYAM TRUST appears to be heading toward Speedy deletion, meaning all evidence of its existance will disappear. The draft has a lot of content about P Naveenkumar and the organization he has founded (the Trust). If you intend to start over, decide whether your goal is an article about him or the Trust, not both. Either way, all information in a draft must be verified by references. Have all references in place before submitting. David notMD (talk) 12:03, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

 Note: The draft in question has been deleted and the OP blocked for contravening the username policy. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:41, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I’ve created a draft disambiguation page at Draft:Mayor West (disambiguation), with the intention of replacing the three hatnoted links at Adam West (Family Guy) with a link to the dab page. As it’s (to my memory) the first non-redirect page I’ve attempted to write, I’m wondering if another editor wouldn’t mind giving it a quick look and seeing if there’s anything out of place, and/or providing any feedback you wish to give. Please don’t feel under any obligation to do so though - I don’t want to force anyone here into reviewing my draft!

All the best - and thanks in advance! A smart kitten (talk) 16:14, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @A smart kitten, and welcome to the teahouse! I happened to come across the disambiguation draft you've created, and it looks like it's perfectly acceptable for the mainspace. However, it seems there might have been a small oversight, as it hasn't been submitted for review yet. Could you kindly submit it for review so that either I or another reviewer can carry out the usual approval process? Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. Thank you! 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 16:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer Yep, I can submit it for review! I deliberately hadn’t done so yet as I wasn’t confident enough in my edits having brought it up to ‘mainspace standard’ yet, and wasn’t sure if there was anything else I wanted to add (if you’re interested, take a look at the html comments in the page source). But I’ll try and polish it off and submit it today. All the best, A smart kitten (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer If you don’t mind the question, can I ask if there’s a policy/guideline on which order people should be placed in on a dab page? I found MOS:DABORDER, but unless I’m missing something, I couldn’t find an answer there. All the best, A smart kitten (talk) 16:52, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Ah. it was there in bullet point 4 all along, I just missed it earlier: …then alphabetically or chronologically as appropriate. A smart kitten (talk) 17:01, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@A smart kitten, everything looks great; there's no need for any changes. You can go ahead and submit it for review now. Typically, disambiguation drafts are reviewed within a day, so please be patient and wait for a reviewer to have some time to review your draft. Thank You! 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 17:04, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

i want to upload photos on wikipedia page of 2 politicians and there are their official portrait on the Indian government sites because they are member of parliament.should I upload the official portrait from government site WikiAnchor10 (talk) 06:37, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@WikiAnchor10, Maybe. Look under "licensing" at these examples:[8][9]. Perhaps something similar applies to the pictures you have in mind. If you don't get a better reply here, try asking at Commons:Help desk, and include the weblinks of the photos. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:20, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@WikiAnchor10 The Indian government has a very open policy and there is a template commons:Template:GODL-India you can use to tag your upload. It will be reviewed by an admin to confirm that the URL you used as the source of the file does indeed comply to the rules. Make sure you don't suggest the image is your "own work"! Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:05, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@WikiAnchor10 I can see you uploaded two images today an Commons. File:Sunny Deol official portrait.jpg looks fine to me - it's from an official Indian government site and the tags look right. The other image, File:Hanuman Beniwal during rally.jpg is not from a government site, but from the site of a political party and has a copyright tag at the bottom. There's nothing that would support a compatible license for Wikipedia. That image does not look it will for Wikipedia. Ravensfire (talk) 15:58, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for my mistake on second photo, should I remove that and upload a another one which is available on this link https://www.india.gov.in/my-government/indian-parliament/hanuman-beniwal WikiAnchor10 (talk) 03:57, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@WikiAnchor10 Yes and yes. Anything obtained from india.gov.in is suitable for Commons, as far as I'm aware. Indeed, I think that there are bots which do the transfers for some images but I don't know the details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:11, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

yes you are right , I am talking about Hanuman Beniwal Page ,on this page image from gov.in site is removed by a bot few days ago and then I uploaded a new image from his party official site but why the government officials image was removed by bot ?? WikiAnchor10 (talk) 15:01, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@WikiAnchor10 Apparently, this was the deletion discussion at Commons: c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by SharadSHRD7. I'm not sure of the details and you might be best to take any further general questions to Commons at c:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:30, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

A prolific editor spends part of her day excising text that is backed only by a deprecated source (she does not, so far as I can see, address the vast acreages of text that has no explicit source at all). This behaviour is justifiable, as I understand it, on the grounds that the text may not be reliable.

The particular source I noticed is Find A Grave, a site which like Wikipedia is user-generated but unlike Wikipedia seems to have only light editorial control. While some of its information is 100% accurate, backed up by burial records and photographs, some is speculation or plain error and therefore as a whole the site has to be suspect.

As the extremely busy editor deletes and passes on in seconds, I assume she cannot have done much assessment of the accuracy of the text. Since it might in fact be wholly correct, rather than instant deletion might it perhaps be more helpful to tag it as “unreliable source” or “better source needed”? Belle Fast (talk) 09:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

As the text remains in the article history, if it is accurate it can always be restored if a reliable source can be found. Unsourced or unreliably sourced content does not belong on wikipedia. While in some cases, a tag could be helpful, it's really the prerogative of the reviewing editor - it's better to remove the content than have unsourced or unreliably sourced content remaining in main space. Polyamorph (talk) 09:26, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Belle Fast, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you feel this strongly, you are free to revert the change and add a {{cn}} to it. But don't be surprised if somebody else comes along and reverts you - after all, what you will be doing is explicitly adding uncited material. Best would be for somebody (the original editor, or you) to find a better source. But we are all volunteers, and work on what we choose.

I myself am more likely to tag plausible but unsourced material than delete it; but as Polyamorph says, it is not clear that I am improving Wikipedia by doing so. Arguably, unsourced material is of zero value to Wikipedia, because a reader has no way to check it. ColinFine (talk) 09:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks for swift and helpful replies!

My personal feeling is that if the text looks right but just lacks a credible source, tag it, If there's no means of knowing whether it's right or wrong, ignore it. Only if fairly confident that it's misplaced or plain wrong, delete it. Belle Fast (talk) 12:37, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

PS While accepting the logic of excising inadequately sourced stuff, if everybody followed this counsel of perfection we'd end up with an encyclopedia like Stalin's USSR in the film Ninotchka: “The last mass trials have been a great success. There are going to be fewer but better Russians”.

It's perfectly possible to completely make up stuff that looks right. Just ask ChatGPT. Tagging unsourced info is fine. Removing it is also fine. This is clearly more critical for some articles more than others, such as biographies of living people. Polyamorph (talk) 17:53, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, i saw there was a user that edited wrong infos that i corrected back as they were very inappropriate but also saw there are sources i am not sure they are reliable especially from its early life section. One of the source doesnt mention what is written there. I also created his career section using reliable sources. Could someone tell me if those sources (early life section) should be kept or should i remove them? Veganpurplefox (talk) 18:19, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

recently I watched the movie 'In the Valley of Elah'. Very impressive. I then read the article on the movie on Wikipedia. The description of the story of the movie was correct. But the only two reviews that really mattered, the only ones that appreciated and recognized the value of the movie, the essential ones, weren't mentioned. Those were the reviews by Roger Ebers and Rolling Stones' Peter Travers. Is it possible to insert them? And if so, how can it be done? (cab I do it?) The link is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Valley_of_Elah

thanks and greetings,

Barbara Bee.bees2002 (talk) 21:43, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Bee.bees2002! Thanks for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to change it. We encourage you to be bold in updating pages, because wikis like ours develop faster when everybody edits. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. To edit, just click the "edit" button at the top of "Critical reception" section. You can always preview your edits before you publish them or test them out in the sandbox. If you need additional help, check out our tutorial. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:46, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Bee.bees2002 I noticed some concerning wording there, "But the only two reviews that really mattered, the only ones that appreciated and recognized the value of the movie, the essential ones, weren't mentioned". I'd recommend you read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, and Wikipedia:NPOV. Industrial Insect (talk) 18:51, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I got a little confused, I tried to correctly cite, the tweet, the last cite in honours section at List of Tottenham Hotspur F.C. records and statistics, however there are few red errors. Can anyone help me fix it. Thank you very much. Regards. Govvy (talk) 16:37, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I believe I have fixed it. You were using parameter "id" instead of "number" and "username" instead of "user". CodeTalker (talk) 17:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Can i ask why sometimes twitter tweets cant be added while in some articles they are added? I was told not to cite tweets but if we can do it how can we do it? Veganpurplefox (talk) 17:54, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@CodeTalker: Thank you, much appreciated. @Veganpurplefox: I think tweets are okay from official sources. However, that then becomes a primary source when wikipedia is suppose to be built on secondary. So I would assume tweets should probably only be used sparingly. Govvy (talk) 18:27, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Could it be used in Draft:Burning Men to show the person point of view camera they use so people could know what it is? Cause it shows the behind the scenes on the official twitter of the film Veganpurplefox (talk) 18:31, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Its in the production filming section Veganpurplefox (talk) 18:33, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

See WP:TWITTER for a discussion about when Twitter and similar self-published sources may be used. CodeTalker (talk) 19:03, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Good Afternoon,

My article on Barkley Dubis was recently declined publication by an editor as they said it did not fit the criteria of notable persons. In the San Diego Punk and Video Art scene Mr. Dubis is a very important person and his work has been very influential on the aesthetics and tone of the scene at large. How can I emphasize this in the article so that it may be more acceptable for submission?

Many thanks! Zebean264 (talk) 20:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Zebean264. An acceptable Wikipedulia article summarizes significant coverage of the topic published by reliable, independent sources, which are presented as references. Your draft lacks any such references. The URLs at the end do not meet the standard. Cullen328 (talk) 20:48, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Zebean264, asserting that Dubis "is a very important person" will have no effect at all. To establish that he is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article, you'll need to find several reliable independent sources with in-depth discussion of him, and cite then in your draft. It currently lists six sources, but does not cite any of them. I suspect that anyway none of them satisfies those criteria. Maproom (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi everyone! I have recently created the Draft:i18next but was declined twice. The first reason was due to an advertisement-like article that I have already fixed. The second one was because the references used do not show that the subject qualifies for a wikipedia article. However, before starting this page, I reviewed articles similar to i18next, like KateX , Bindows, JerryScript, and Raphaël (JavaScript library). Despite having limited resources, these pages were successfully created, which gave me hope that I could do the same for i18next. If you check their references, you'll notice that some of the sources they presented are similar to i18next. So, I'm wondering why those pages were accepted while my draft wasn't. Please don't get me wrong; I'm just curious and would like to understand the reason for my draft's rejection so that I can improve it in the future. By the way, i18next was created in 2011, which means it has been around for over a decade now. I hope you can assist me with this. Thank you to those who are taking the time to review my draft.~~~~ Iamsuperingbo (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Iamsuperingbo Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. So my first question is if you are associated with i18next in some way.

Second, it's not always a good idea to use other articles as a model, as these too could be inappropriate and you would be unaware of this as a new user. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate content to get by us. We can only address what we know about. That another article exist does not necessarily mean that it was "approved" by anyone, the draft submission process has not always existed, and it is possible to create a draft without using that process(though inadvisable, and having a connection to the topic makes it necessary). Please read other stuff exists. If you want to use other articles as a model, use those classified as good articles, which have been vetted by the community. 331dot (talk) 16:17, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

The main issue with your draft is that it just tells about the existence of the framework and its features. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. "Significant coverage" is that which goes into detail about what the source sees as significant/important/influential about the topic. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Iamsuperingbo, for what it's worth, Bindows and Raphaël (JavaScript library) were both first written in 2009, long before the Articles for Creation process was started. Cullen328 (talk) 21:18, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

IPs are people too 🇺🇸🦅 08:10, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. The best place to discuss changes to Wikipedia itself are at the Village Pump. You may want to first test out how your ideas will be received at the Idea Lab section of the VP. 331dot (talk) 08:13, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi IPs are people too. What is it about? There may be better places or maybe it has already been discussed and we can tell you where. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh, okay. IPs are people too 🇺🇸🦅 22:15, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

I have been working on a page but it won’t let me post bc I am not a registered user. How do I do so? 2600:1017:B803:6C34:95DF:A0A2:52A5:4A4B (talk) 22:44, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Find the "login" button and click on it. You should see an option to create an account. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:49, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Click here to create an account. Pecopteris (talk) 22:49, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

how? 71.4.186.194 (talk) 23:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

You can submit a request for an image to be uploaded at Wikipedia:Files for upload. If you would like to upload an image yourself, you will need to create an account - after being registered for four days and having 10 edits, you will automatically be given permission to upload images. Tollens (talk) 23:34, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

A new editor reports

The thumbnail picture for neo-nazism is a picture of gore. Is that intentional? Apologies if this has already been discussed, I didn't find anything regarding this when I looked, but am also quite new. Oxturn (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Regrettably, the report is true and there is clearly some disruptive vandalism involved. The article neo-nazism is a redirect to Neo-Nazism but I can't see anything in either article that would account for this behaviour. Can someone resolve, please? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:45, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

A template was vandalized. The vandalism has been reverted and no longer shows in the article but the preview uses caching and takes time to automatically update. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Images in link hover-over popups. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:18, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

purging the page can help (i just did that for both pages, and the image no longer shows up for me ) ayakanaa ( t · c ) 01:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I want to put social media links on my Wikipedia page, but no they are being saved. Can you help me solve this problem? I want to add my website

Samuel Afful Klauspca (talk) 15:45, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. It is highly inadvisable for you to attempt to directly edit the article about you- please read the autobiography policy. You may submit an edit request(click for instructions) on the article talk page, Talk:Samuel Afful, describing what you want to do. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

NB: Editor is almost certainly a sock puppet as User:1Samuel afful and five other accounts have already been blocked - Arjayay (talk) 15:50, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

User:Kkllop is certainly the one who's been attempting to add such links to that article, not the OP. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:51, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@Arjayay SPI filed: WP:Sockpuppet investigations/1Samuel afful. Best, A smart kitten (talk) 15:53, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

According to WP:ELOFFICIAL, one link to a person's official website or official primary social media presence is not only permitted but encouraged. The link should be in the infobox or in a dedicated "External links" section at the end of the article. Cullen328 (talk) 21:47, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

+1 to Cullen's comment. Perhaps if Mr. Afful (@Klauspca) provided us with one (only one) such link, someone here would be willing to add it on his behalf? Pecopteris (talk) 03:00, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello all,

I am currently working on a draft on "throw ups" which are a type of graffiti. It's currently in my sandbox. Based on my understanding, parenthesis in titles are only for if there's already an existing article (e.g. "Bob Bobson" is an article, and a second article is "Bob Bobson (author)". For throw ups though, there isn't a page called "throw up" but it is a redirect to vomiting, and I expect more people searching wikipedia for "throw up" would be search for vomiting.

Therefore, would it be better to title the draft/article as "Throw up (graffiti)" and leave the redirect, or to make the page "throw up" and put in a "this article is a about the graffiti style, for the action of vomiting see vomiting" (or something like that).

Thank you :) -- NotCharizard ^🗨 07:11, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

"Throw up (graffiti)" would seem to me to be the better option, since vomiting is likely the primary topic for "Throw up". There is a hatnote template on Vomiting that should be edited when your article is published in order to allow readers who wind up there to reach the correct page:

Currently, {{Redirect-multi|4|Vomit|Emesis|Heaving|Puke|other uses|Vomit (disambiguation)|the butterfly genus|Emesis (genus)|the 2021 Argentine film|PussyCake|the sailing terms|Heaving to|and|Careening|the municipality of Albania|Pukë|other uses|Puke (disambiguation)}} produces

"Vomit", "Emesis", "Heaving", and "Puke" redirect here. For other uses, see Vomit (disambiguation). For the butterfly genus, see Emesis (genus). For the 2021 Argentine film, see PussyCake. For the sailing terms, see Heaving to and Careening. For the municipality of Albania, see Pukë. For other uses, see Puke (disambiguation).

but if you change it to {{Redirect-multi|5|Vomit|Emesis|Heaving|Throw up|Puke|other uses|Vomit (disambiguation)|the butterfly genus|Emesis (genus)|the 2021 Argentine film|PussyCake|the sailing terms|Heaving to|and|Careening|the municipality of Albania|Pukë|the type of graffiti|Throw up (graffiti)|other uses|Puke (disambiguation)}} (wording is up to you, but something similar), it will produce

"Vomit", "Emesis", "Heaving", "Throw up", and "Puke" redirect here. For other uses, see Vomit (disambiguation). For the butterfly genus, see Emesis (genus). For the 2021 Argentine film, see PussyCake. For the sailing terms, see Heaving to and Careening. For the municipality of Albania, see Pukë. For the type of graffiti, see Throw up (graffiti). For other uses, see Puke (disambiguation).

Tollens (talk) 07:28, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Notcharizard Interesting draft! One minor point. You shouldn't duplicate the URL for a citation that has a doi. That URL will make the title a blue-link, which is misleading if the article in not open-access. If indeed the target is open-access, then use of the parameter |doi-access=free will create the blue-link automatically. There is a bot that goes around cleaning up these sort of errors but it is probably better to avoid them (e.g. your current #3, #5, #9 & #10) Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:56, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull What do you mean by duplicating the url? -- NotCharizard ^🗨 22:58, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

@Notcharizard I've made one edit to remove one of the links I'm talking about. The DOI ends up in the same place as the URL I removed but should not suffer from link rot in the way the URL might. The article title is now not blue-linked but could be made so if |doi-access=free was added (which isn't valid for this citation). Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:06, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Ah okay, I understand now! Thanks for showing with an example, that makes sense with link rot, I think I'd just always let the bot sort it out for me before so I appreciate the extra lesson I learnt here :D -- NotCharizard ^🗨 04:45, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! And thanks for the info on "primary topics" I don't think I'd read that before :) -- NotCharizard ^🗨 22:57, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Anyone here would you please sugest me any videos online that teach Wikipedia policies, guidelines and the system? Worldviewfrom (talk) 16:44, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Worldviewfrom and welcome to the teahouse! I don't know about any editing tutorial videos, but I can help you by providing links to some helpful policy and help pages. You can have a look at Help:Editing for assistance regarding how to edit Wikipedia in general. For information about the editing policy, please refer to Wikipedia:Editing policy. If you'd like to know more about how and where you can contribute, take a look at Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia and if you need assistance from someone, visit Wikipedia:Questions. 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 17:18, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@Worldviewfrom WP:TUTORIAL has some videos, but much is text. You can also try searching Youtube. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:39, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@Worldviewfrom: There's also a video at WP:EASYREFBEGIN that shows how to add references. GoingBatty (talk) 02:13, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I like that one, he uses both autofill and refname. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:51, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

This talk page has ugly CoI warnings from many years ago. Shouldn't they be cleared since the article itself changed a lot? Thx B030510 (talk) 09:34, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, B030510, and welcome to the teahouse. Material is almost never deleted from article talk pages, though it can be archived. Since Talk pages are not part of the encyclopaedia, and will not be seen except by those going looking for them, why does this matter? ColinFine (talk) 09:37, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@ColinFine: May be, because the template links the article (its talk page, actually) to the Category:Articles with connected contributors, which attracts attention of those who try to 'neutralize' POV? So if a template warns about some issue, or potential issue (possible bias, in this case) which has already been resolved, it is misleading. And then it should be deleted. --CiaPan (talk) 09:47, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@CiaPan - good point. Now that the discussion is archived by @Polyamorph, the remaining issues are the category and the grotesquely large banner listing 1 (one) connected user. I wouldn't blink if the banner was 3 lines high, but it's huge, has blinking lights on it and a loud siren (no, no lights or a siren - I am kidding :) That connected user didn't touch the page for 8 years now. Must the show go on? Thx B030510 (talk) 06:26, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the COI notice, the user was active for only a few weeks in 2014 and hasn't edited since. Polyamorph (talk) 07:20, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

• I have archived the discussion from 2015. There is a link to the talk page archives in the banner at the top of the talk page. Polyamorph (talk) 12:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

  @Polyamorph Fair enough, and thank you for doing that. B030510 (talk) 06:20, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

How can i get a edit notice for a Wikipedia page removed? A.FLOCK (talk) 14:34, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

A.FLOCK Hello and welcome. Can you be more specific? I'm not sure what you mean by "edit notice". 331dot (talk) 15:14, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Editnotices/Page/Laser_Kiwi_flag A.FLOCK (talk) 01:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

You cannot "get the edit notice removed". It's not quite that simple. Maybe, you could find an administrator who'd remove it, but that's not the best way to proceed. Better ways to proceed would be:

1) Get to 500 edits. Looks like you're at 293. Only 207 to go.

2) You can post on the "talk" page for the article you want to edit, and request that someone else make your edit on your behalf.

Hope that helps. Pecopteris (talk) 01:03, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@A.FLOCK: For the second option suggested by Pecopteris I'd encourage you to see Wikipedia:Edit requests first. --CiaPan (talk) 07:37, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

While editing Dominant caste, a Redlink appeared in source 8, in which i added a quote. Can someone help to fix it.- Admantine123 (talk) 07:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done The text which you quoted included three linefeeds and the sentence fragment "The emergence of the backward castes on the political scene in Bihar was due to". I have removed all those. You may want to restore the sentence fragment together with the rest of the sentence. There was no "redlink"; there was a red error warning "line feed character in |quote= at position 882", which indicated what was wrong. Maproom (talk) 07:57, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

The page "name" does not exist. You can create a draft and submit it for review, but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered. Surat antcomp (talk) 23:46, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Surat antcomp, and welcome to the Teahouse! You can use the article wizard to help you create a draft, I would recommend you also read WP:YFA and WP:BACKWARD before starting. You may also be interested in contributing to a Wikipedia which uses a different language than English - see WP:List of Wikipedias for the full list. Tollens (talk) 23:52, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

IT appears you have created two drafts about the same person: Draft:Indah Megahwati and Draft:Ir. Indah Megahwati, MP. Neither is properly referenced. David notMD (talk) 08:03, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi people I need your help with making Demiboy and Demigirl Demiboy609 (talk) 02:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Deimboy_and_Deimgirl

@Demiboy609: Based on the draft review comments, you need more references. WP:REFB is a good resource and also WP:N RudolfRed (talk) 02:30, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Demiboy609 Fix spelling throughout. Demiboy and demigirl, not deimboy and deimgirl. David notMD (talk) 07:39, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

doesn't this mean the draft should be moved to one whose title doesn't have that minor spelling mistake? cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 20:51, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

There is a Simple Wikipedia page for "Demigender". You might have more success if you take inspiration from that. It has some more usable sources. The title would be good to copy as well as it's broader and shorter. VintageVernacular (talk) 08:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC) And now that I look again, English Wikipedia has demigender as a redirect to a small section on another page with some sources you may find usable. VintageVernacular (talk) 08:24, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

hiya. since the UK recently declared the Wagner mercenary group a terrorist organisation, i would appreciate it if someone could update the page to reflect that, as i am unable to edit it since the Wagner group page has been locked Bird244 (talk) 14:55, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Bird244. You can make an edit request for a change in a protected article. ColinFine (talk) 15:10, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Bird244 You should do as ColinFine suggests on the talk page of that article; Talk:Wagner Group. 331dot (talk) 15:13, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

thanks Bird244 (talk) 09:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I am working on a draft article named Draft:dono (2023 film) and I want to upload a promotional poster for this film but I don't know how to upload copyrighted posters for fair use , and I mistakenly uploaded a poster File:Dono theatrical poster.jpg , can anyone please delete this and upload the same in right way so that I can complete my work on that article. Thanks WikiAnchor10 (talk) 06:58, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

WikiAnchor10, only an administrator at Commons can delete the file that you wrongly uploaded. They are overworked, and few of them spend time here. I have therefore applied for its deletion (which is something that you could have done). ¶ "Fair use" is a claim made for the appearance of a particular image (or sound file or whatever) in a particular article. No claim can be made for appearance in a draft. ¶ Incidentally, I read in the draft that: The film centers around contemporary romantic relationships against the backdrop of an opulent destination wedding. This makes it sound utterly generic. Rather than worry about an image, you should consider the text and its sources: this cited source, for example, smells like an advertorial. -- Hoary (talk) 07:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@WikiAnchor10, fair use images are only allowed in the main article space. They are regularly removed from draft articles. I would hold off trying to upload it until the article is moved out of draft. Ravensfire (talk) 13:56, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Ravensfire for your helpful information. WikiAnchor10 (talk) 14:43, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I have just had my first Wikipedia article rejected, I was most dissapointed, but I am continuing in my attempt to get a local artist recognised.

It says it cant be verified which I understand but his works are available to view at artuk.orghttps://artuk.org/discover/artworks/search/keyword:ernest-ham--referrer:global-search/page/2

I did not include any images in my Wikipedia page.

I just need help in getting started

Brian Kidd Ngraeditor (talk) 11:20, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

His works merely confirm that he was an artist. That is not in doubt. However, to qualify for a Wikipedia article he would need to be a notable artist, as defined at WP:NARTIST. Have you read WP:YFA? Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:25, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Shantavira for your reply I now understand why my article was rejected. Of course being a notable artist or not is down to personal opinion. I did briefly read both the articles you mentioned and it made perfect sense to me.

I will have a think on it for a while and decide what to do. Thank you Ngraeditor (talk) 11:47, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Just a note, @Ngraeditor, "notability" in the Wikipedia context is not down to personal opinion. We have a very specific meaning of notability which is defined at WP:GNG. Qcne (talk) 12:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the teahouse. For creating an article on Wikipedia, the subject need to have enough WP:NOTABILITY, and got confirmed by WP:Reliable source. For what kinds of people are considered have enough notability, you may want to have a read on Wikipedia:Notability_(people), especially WP:NACTOR or WP:NARTIST -Lemonaka‎ 11:45, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Lemonaka yes I understand now about the notability of a person. I think his artworks are very notable but I understand others may not. Ernest Ham has some local accountability but because he did not sell many if any of artworks he is not widely known. Ngraeditor (talk) 11:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Do you have some reliable sources to provide that Ernest Ham has local accountability? if yes, please add it to your drafts as reference. -Lemonaka‎ 11:57, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes I have one source from the internet https://www.southallinpictures.com/e-l-ham I am not sure if this group is still operating or not but locally you often see his paintings in print Ngraeditor (talk) 12:00, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Essentially, what we would be looking for is some coverage of the artist or his work. This could be in newspapers, books, magazines or any other publication (online or offline, as long as you can provide the details). Is there any coverage of his exhibitons or his life?

Unfortunately, if you can't find at least two pieces of coverage, it likely won't be possible to have the article accepted. MarchOfTheGreyhounds 12:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Ngraeditor, I don't understand why each paragraph has just one sentence. Or why we have to wait till the fifth paragraph before we encounter even a hint ("he was a talented craftsman") of noteworthiness. Indeed, we have to wait till the seventh before we learn that he was a painter. -- Hoary (talk) 12:10, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ngraeditor As an aside, your draft was not rejected but merely declined. The former means "give up" and the latter try to improve to Wikipedia standards. You have a long way to go. We don't link external websites in the body text of articles (see WP:EL) but can wikilink things that already have an article here. Note that it doesn't matter whether you, or I, think that Ham was an excellent artist. What matters is that others have published about him in reliable sources and any article must be based solely on what these sources say. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I think that is due to my inexperience of being a Wikipedia creator, there is very little information on him available but I will take heed of your comments and try to make a better page for him Ngraeditor (talk) 12:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say, but I think you might be wasting your time, Ngraeditor. If very little has been written about him, then there's no way for there to be an article that will be accepted for publication. Everything in the article needs to be based on what published sources say about the subject, who also needs to pass the threshold explained at WP:GOLDENRULE. If the sources simply don't exist then no amount of work by you will change this. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:38, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Ngraeditor: I don't know if you have read the information contained in the decline notices, by which I mean not just the notices themselves but also the various hyperlinks to relevant policies and guidelines? If you haven't, I recommend doing so now. They are not just decorative, they actually provide the grounds why the draft is declined, to save us reviewers having to explain every reason anew each time. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:25, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ngraeditor, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that my attempt to get a local artist recognised is precisely what we mean by promotion, which is forbidden anywhere in Wikipedia. Once your artist has already been "recognised" by several independent reliable sources, you can write an article which summarises those sources. Until then, you are trying to do something inconsistent with the purposes of Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 14:03, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Since the artist died in 1958 and the majority of their work was donated to local libraries, I don't think this is promotion. Probably just a brand new user who maybe lives in the area and thought this local artist might be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Valereee (talk) 14:33, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Valereee, you hit the nail right on the head Ngraeditor (talk) 14:49, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Because the artist is recognised by artuk.org Art UK I didnt think he would be unrecognised, I admit to being unused to the rules of Wikipedia but as this was my first attempt at putting something on Wikipedia i will know in future to make a better job of it Ngraeditor (talk) 14:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Ngraeditor, starting out in your first edits creating an article from scratch can be frustrating. Art UK is a perfectly fine source, but the article about them says they list more than 50K UK artists. It's not likely all 50K are notable.

We do want you here! If you're interested in art, you might check WP:WikiProject Arts. Valereee (talk) 14:53, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello everybody! It's good to see you again. I am searching for sources for two articles I am working with, and I was wondering if Genius is considered a reliable source to use in the articles. Thanks in advance ~ fenia🖤^tellmehi 18:29, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Fisforfenia according to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_258#Genius.com and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_206#Genius_as_a_source?, Genius should not be used to source song lyrics, since the website is partially user-generated. In the future, you can search the archives of WP:RSN or check WP:RSP to see if a source was already discussed.

Of course, it may be appropriate to open a new discussion if the website's policies have changed since last discussed in 2019. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 18:45, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

How do I replace an image Flags and Geography (talk) 01:29, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Flags and Geography, I think you're asking how to replace one image with a different image? You just swap out the filename. If you tell us which image you want to replace, we can give you clearer instructions. Valereee (talk) 01:37, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Flags and Geography Help:Pictures should give you all you need to know. If not, please come back for further advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:06, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Flags and Geography: The answer depends on what you actually ask about. Do you want to replace the image itself, that is put another graphical contents under the same file name (for example, to improve perspective, fix brightness or colors saturation etc. without substantial change in depicting the subject)? Or do you want to replace some picture in an article with another one, without replacing the file itself (so that, for example, the same picture in another article remains unchanged)? Or something else? --CiaPan (talk) 19:08, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse. I wanted to get feedback and edit suggestions for a new draft article in my sandbox - User:/RustyatMTIGlobal/sandbox

Thank you for your help. Rusty at MTI Global (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:Rusty at MTI Global/sandbox – dudhhr ^talk_contribs^she_her 17:58, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Rusty at MTI Global. Welcome to the Teahouse.

Your article in it's current form is inappropriate for Wikipedia: it reads like a PR advert and therefore breaks our strict WP:NEUTRAL language policy. It'll need complete re-drafting to remove all the promotional language. Qcne (talk) 18:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. As Qcne said, please remove all promotional language as per WP:NEUTRAL. Given your username, it may be that you are affiliated with the organisation MTI Global. If you are, you should immediately disclose your affiliation with the institute as per WP:DISCLOSE. Also, as per WP:COI, you are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly.

Regards, ContributeToTheWiki (talk • contribs) 18:45, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

FWIW you are also in breach of the guidelines at WP:MISSION, WP:EL, and WP:EDITORIAL. Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:56, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Not to beat a dead horse, but this definitely shouldn't be sugarcoated: that article in its current form is such an insanely flagrant violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines against promotional material (not to mention WP:NORG) that "feedback and edit suggestions" consists of: do not put any more time and effort into this lost cause, and read WP:NOTHERE. Even if you delete the draft, start over from scratch, and abide by neutrality policies this time, the organization categorically does not meet notability guidelines, and thus no article about it can possibly be accepted at this time. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 20:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello all, I am writing my first Wikipedia edit after 20ish years of using articles. It is for an open source project that is pretty small. I am not part of the dev team or anything but I like the software and am in the Discord, so when they asked for someone to do the Wiki article I volunteered. T

he feed back included that there were not enough outside sources and it seemed like an advert. I think these are both fair although it is free software so it is not selling anything. The thing is, it isn't a very big project. There are not really any outside sources to point to.

I did make sure that the article gives specifics on the design philosophy, examples of what makes it unique from other similar projects, and linked to its manuals and materials. Is this a situation where the project is just too small for a Wikipedia article or is there a way to improve it to meet standards.

Thanks for any tips/support you can provide.

This is the article in question if that helps: Draft:MiniScript Autistmouse (talk) 20:25, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Autistmouse Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If a topic does not receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources, it does not merit an article on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about something and what it does- Wikipedia wants to know what those unaffiliated with a topic choose to say about it and what makes it significant/important/influential.

The good news is your draft was only declined, not rejected. "Rejected" has a specific meaning in the draft submission process- that a draft may not be resubmitted. "Declined" means a draft may be resubmitted if you can address the concerns of the reviewer. If this project receives coverage later, an article may be possible later. 331dot (talk) 20:29, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for responding, and for clarifying the difference between rejected and declined. I will pass this along to the discord. Even though the article didn't get posted I still feel like i learned something about Wikipedia, so that is something. Cheers! Autistmouse (talk) 20:32, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm adding a section to an existing page. Can I save it as a draft before publishing? rootsmusic (talk) 18:15, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rootsmusic: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1199. If you're editing the page directly, no; virtually every edit on Wikipedia is public (if you know where to look). You could work on it in one of your userpages like your sandbox beforehand to see how it'll look. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:25, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Tenryuu! I don't mind a public draft, but I don't want to publish on the page until I return to finalize my draft. rootsmusic (talk) 18:28, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rootsmusic You can make a personal sandbox (Help:My sandbox) for work in progress. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:05, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I am writing an article about a public senior high school. The problem is that I struggle finding reliable third-party sources save for T-score rankings. Thus far I want to link the article to the school's website and Tokyo Metropolitan Government.

Should I not bother with finishing it, or is there a place I can get help with finding sources? SkyOfRose (talk) 21:08, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@SkyOfRose As the sources are likely to be in Japanese, it is going to be difficult for most editors here to help. Is there an article already in ja:Wikipedia where you might find some sources? If not, you could look at Category:Schools in Japan and seek out editors who are currently active on some of these (via their User Talk Pages). Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

The good news is that there are indeed articles in other-language versions, linked at Wikidata here. Read WP:TRANSLATE and WP:NSCHOOL before doing much more drafting for the English Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:27, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! SkyOfRose (talk) 21:34, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull, the relevant article in ja:WP is this. It cites a grand total of zero sources. (A very common phenomenon in ja:WP.) ¶ SkyOfRose, it seems that you are trying to write your draft backward(s). I fear that the enterprise is doomed. -- Hoary (talk) 21:42, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Hoary, my Japanese wasn't up to realising that! Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thus far I found some coverage by major newspapers. However, the only information I can find establishes the fact that school exists, but nothing about its curriculum or extracurriculars. Not enough to write a barebones article, let alone something more detailed.

Thank you for forward-backward article, I will stick to the first method, and focus on something else. SkyOfRose (talk) 21:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Earlier this year after getting a bit annoyed trying to work out which cities certain places were in, as the places themselves couldn't be trusted to put their full and correct addresses, I realised that you could see the city/district borders on Google Maps by typing "City of Blank" for example.

Tonight I've found out about a place which I didn't even know existed, and doesn't anymore as its since been demolished, however it's boundary can be seen, as the fence for the non-existent place still exists, along with just 2 small buildings (which look like those energy storage type buildings).

Roughly 35% of the area is on one side of the city border, and the other 65% is on the other side of the border.

Obviously I will add the full address if I can find it, but can we also put that it's location is split between 2 districts? Danstarr69 (talk) 05:04, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Danstarr69, and welcome to the Teahouse! I can't really tell what you're asking - would you mind sharing exactly what article and locations you are referring to? Tollens (talk) 05:07, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Tollens I never tell, until I've finished doing whatever I'm doing.

Basically if a building/estate is 35% in one city, and 65% in an another city, can we say that it's located in both cities?

Slightly off topic, but there's a village in my run by my city which contained some buildings run by the city next door. The village itself is physically split roughly the same, with 65% in my city, and 35% in the city next door, however 100% of the buildings were located in my city's side. However most of those buildings have now been demolished and replaced with residential housing, which the property developers claim to be in the city next door. How that's possible I have no idea (as they should have the same postcodes), as the city next door have basically stolen land, unless there's something I'm missing. Danstarr69 (talk) 05:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Tollens actually now I think about it, I've just remembered somewhere I found earlier this year, with this exact problem, which does exactly what I'm asking... Walt Disney World which is located in Bay Lake, Florida and Lake Buena Vista, Florida.

I can't remember which way around it is, but I'm fairly sure that it's postal address is the city of Lake Buena Vista even though most of the resort is in the city of Bay Lake. The city of Kissimmee, Florida is located next door, but isn't actually inside the theme park area itself. Danstarr69 (talk) 05:40, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure that example helps - the resort is not a single entity, but rather numerous buildings which I assume would be located in one or the other. I assume the location you're talking about is in the UK based on your user page, and the UK also seems quite a lot trickier to determine than the USA from the reading I've just done - I seem to be getting more confused as I read more. It seems entirely possible to me that the answer is simply that the border is poorly defined and that Google Maps is just making it up, but this could also be entirely mistaken - I don't believe I have the knowledge to figure it out for certain. Tollens (talk) 06:04, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Tollens it's simple.

It's almost a perfect square, practically empty piece of grassland surrounded by a fence in the middle of nowhere, which used to contain some significant buildings by the look of it, but now contains just two small buildings and a small track for vehicles.

The Eastern side triangle is in a city and metropolitan borough.

The Western side triangle is over the border in another metropolitan borough.

The border line goes almost from corner to corner, but slightly more in on the South-Eastern side, which is where my 35/65 area estimation comes from.

The entrance and one of the two small buildings is roughly 50 metres away from the physical border sign on the South-Western side.

The second of the two small buildings is in the corner of the North-Eastern side aka the city side, which contains the educational organisation who used to run it, and possibly still own it.

Some sources seem to say it's part of the moorland on the city side, some sources seem to say it's part of the moorland on the metropolitan borough side, and some sources seem to say it's part of both moorlands.

However I don't have a physical address yet. Danstarr69 (talk) 06:57, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I still can't manage to come up with a good answer. It would be completely correct to say that the physical area does exist on both sides of the border - I just have no idea about whether this is the case legally. I've just realized now that you might only have been wondering about the physical properties; if this was the case my apologies for misinterpreting. Tollens (talk) 07:10, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I think located on the border between X and Y is suitable prose, and {{unbulleted list}} can be nestled into the appropriate infobox parameter. That seems like it should get the point across. Folly Mox (talk) 17:08, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Tollens Folly Mox I've just stumbled across another example...

A school which I always thought was based in my city, as it's part of one of one cities 100s of neighbourhoods, is controlled by my city, and is used by other organisations in my city, I've just found out isn't physically located in my city.

An A road follows the border almost perfectly, with the Western side of the road in my city, and the Eastern side of the road where the school is located in the city next door.

However just like the neighbourhood it is part of, it's address is also in my city.

Although there are at least 3 neighbourhoods I know of which are split between the two cities.

It'd be much easier if councils across the country (or the government if they're in charge) decided to draw new city/borough/district borders around the entirety of the neighbourhoods/hamlets/villages/towns they control, to stop any confusion. Danstarr69 (talk) 00:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm adding a paragraph in an existing page. In the VisualEditor's (refToolbar 2.0), how can I cite an existing reference (that has already been cited)? Thanks. rootsmusic (talk) 19:31, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, rootsmusic. What you'll want to do is go to the quotation mark in the toolbar for adding a citation. Next, under 'Add a citation', you'll see 'Automatic', 'Manual', and 'Re-use'. When you click on 'Re-use', you can scroll through the existing citations and choose which one you want. All the best, TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 19:41, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry @TheTechnician27, where's the "quotation mark in the toolbar"? My refToolbar looks like this screenshot. rootsmusic (talk) 19:53, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, that's entirely my bad. I didn't realize you didn't have one. I honestly couldn't say for sure in that case, so I'll step back and let someone who knows more about that layout step in. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 20:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rootsmusic Welcome to the Teahouse. You can use the 'Named Reference' tool to reuse an existing reference. Just click the clipboard icon to the right of the word 'Named reference'. If someone hasn't actually given a 'ref name' to a citation, it'll probably appear as a :0, ;01; 02; 03 etc. If you're still struggling, please pop back and link to the article, specifying the sentence and reference you want to reuse and we'll sort it for you. You could add any new statement yourself and follow it with a {{cn}} template (which appears as ^{[citation needed]}), prior to resolving this issue. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:13, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Rootsmusic switch to source editing, and find the reference you want to use again.

After the word ref make a gap and add the word name along witn an = sign.

So that it looks like this ref name=.

After the equals sign, give the reference a name (preferably related to the subject) in quotation marks, along with a gap and a / symbol after the reference name, for example:

ref name="Football" /

Then all you have to do is copy all the stuff between the...

< and the...

> symbols...

In my example "all the stuff" is ref name="Football" /

Then paste it next to the information you want to reference.

So it will look like this...

^[1] Danstarr69 (talk) 00:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Well, actually, Rootsmusic, no, not quite. If you want "Football" as the name for a reference used more than once, then one instance (conventionally but not necessarily the first) should be <ref name="Football">all the details of author(s), title, access date, etc, here</ref>, and each of the others should be the much simpler <ref name="Football" />. (Incidentally, the name "Football" will only be visible to people editing the article.) The full-details instance may use one of the "cite" templates (e.g. Template:Cite web), but it doesn't have to do so. -- Hoary (talk) 01:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi all, I created an article for a movie but this is the first time I create something and I'm completely lost on what should I do next, how do I get it reviewed and how can this be uploaded to the web. Can someone help me? Filmartandfact (talk) 23:56, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

this is the article... https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Filmartandfact/sandbox&oldid=1174155215 Filmartandfact (talk) 00:00, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Simpler and more flexible way of linking to the draft article: Draft:The Shadow of the Sun (film). --CiaPan (talk) 19:12, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Filmartandfact, and welcome to the Teahouse! I have added the Articles for Creation submission tool to the top of the page for you - to submit the draft for review, you can click the button provided. The review process may take quite some time as there are many articles in the queue, but feel free to continue working on the draft in the meantime - the better the draft, the better the chances of a speedy review. Tollens (talk) 00:03, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

thank you! Filmartandfact (talk) 00:08, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Cool article idea, @Filmartandfact. I wouldn't say I'm a Venezuelan cinema "fan", but it does interest me. I wish you success on your work. If you run into any problems, you can reach out to me on my talk page. Pecopteris (talk) 00:10, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Filmartandfact (talk) 00:16, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Filmartandfact: I removed some promotional wording, did some formatting, and tagged things that need citations. It looks like a promising draft. Please fix the citation issues before resubmitting it. And remember we cannot cite IMDB or any other source consisting of user-generated content. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

In the body of my Wikipedia page draft I say that a person has won numerous awards. This comment refers to an entire later section titled Recent Awards and not to just one award in its list. How do I do this in Wikipedia? In both Word and Acrobat one would first create a target, like the words "Recent Awards", and then create a hyperlink earlier in the document to the target. Is this allowable in Wikipedia? 2601:5C0:C380:4980:BD25:9843:27D3:B53C (talk) 21:48, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. You would WP:wikilink to the relevant section. Your contribution history from this IP has no draft associated with it, so I can't give more detailed advice. Note that we don't use hyperlinks within the text of articles: see WP:EL Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:55, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Carol A. Mullen Tollens (talk) 00:52, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes it is allowable. But the fact that it's allowable doesn't mean that the result would be satisfactory. Currently, the list of recent awards is sourced to a list attributed to Mullen herself. Also, "award" is given a surprisingly wide interpretation. Compare that with, say, this list, in which each award is referenced independently of the awardee, and which doesn't mention visiting professorships (which are briefly mentioned, and of course referenced, in the penultimate paragraph of this section). -- Hoary (talk) 03:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

i just need tips (I don't care how advanced or low level they are) Bob waterson (talk) 03:41, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Bob waterson, and welcome to the Teahouse! You might be interested in the tutorial for new editors, or a guide on writing entirely new articles if that's what you're looking to do. If you're looking for guidance on something more specific, I'm happy to point you toward other resources for particular topics. Tollens (talk) 03:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Pretty much the title. Professor Penguino (talk) 04:23, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Professor Penguino, you can tag it with {{db-g7}}. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 04:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Much thanks! :) Professor Penguino (talk) 04:28, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I recently had a new article rejected because it was an essay and lacked encyclopedic style with a neutral point of view. I have gone through the article a couple of times to improve the language, take out anything that is not neutral, and add citations. I am wondering if someone could please look over the article and tell me if I have addressed the reviewer's concerns. My apologies if this is the wrong forum for this request. If that is the case, could you point me somewhere where I might get feedback? This is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Minflux Thank you in advance! AByolia (talk) 18:43, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

AByolia maybe you should resubmit the draft. That's how you get feedback. You can also ask the original reviewer what things specifically can be fixed. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 18:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, sungodtemple. I confess that I have been a bit nervous about resubmitting. I really appreciate the pointer and maybe I can ask the reviewer for help. AByolia (talk) 06:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

@AByolia Clearly you have put a large amount of work into the draft and, slightly to my surprise, none of it seems to be a copyvio, so: well done! Nevertheless, on such a specialist topic there will be only a few Wikipedia editors capable of giving feedback and help in improving it further. I suggest you post at whichever Project Talk Pages you think might have relevant expertise. I note that you have already added project tags to the draft's Talk Page and so are aware of likely places to ask. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:27, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mike Turnbull. Thank you for looking at the article and for your kind feedback. Good idea; I will try a Project Talk page and see if I can get some support there (they seem so busy!). Really appreciate it. AByolia (talk) 06:12, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

'some words are very specific and i cant understand the meaning like , 182.178.77.227 (talk) 06:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

It's unclear what words you're asking about. If the word is Wikipedia-specific jargon, you may be able to find it at Wikipedia:Glossary, or you can list the word or words you are confused about here and we'll do our best to help. Tollens (talk) 06:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

[10], from here I want direct link of Salempur MP Ravindra Kushwaha. His Profile is opening but since I am using mobile, I am not able to copy direct link to his profile to cite as source. Users are able to get direct link from this website. As for example see Upendra Nath Verma, External link section. Admantine123 (talk) 04:22, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Admantine123, I have the same problem that you have, even though I'm using a computer showing Wikipedia in what I think is called "desktop" mode (and anyway isn't "mobile"). The page that Upendra Nath Verma links to has a completely different URL. -- Hoary (talk) 05:26, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

MPGuy2824, can you help us here. I want the detail Bioprofile of member of Indian Parliament. Want to cite them as source, as is done on many pages. But, I am not able to copy the link to direct profile of MPs. Even I am not getting this type of profile for MPs [11] -Admantine123 (talk) 05:33, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Had to do some stuff with browser dev tools, but I got [12]. Get archive.org to archive the current state, as we can't be sure how long the parliment website will keep this URL structure. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:03, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, yupp, i am archiving the links which i already have. You are right, i accessed some of the MP profiles for the first lok sabha and i found that they were missing on original website as well. They don't keep it permanently. I will be asking few more bio of the MPs, whose Wikipedia article, I am going to expand after sometime.-Admantine123 (talk) 06:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

This is @PunishedRottweilerAppreciator, I'm posting from a new account. I've lost access to my Wikipedia account. My computer had to be formatted and it was the only place where my Wikipedia password was saved. I didn't enter an email address when creating my account and now cannot recover my account. Can someone help me out? Matarisvan (talk) 07:48, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

If you didn't associate an email address with your old account then it cannot be recovered. Simply switch to your new account. If you wish you can leave a note on your new and old user pages to explain this. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:04, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

(Excuse me for posting this again.) I've heard there is an option to merge the edit history of your old account with your new account. How can this be done? I believe if Wikipedia admins can verify that I did create the first account then they do allow the merge. In that case, I've on my computer the original PDF drafts of all the articles I created, which no one but the user who created them has access to. Matarisvan (talk) 10:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

afaik it used to be possible, but the developers stopped supporting that feature due to server load. Ca ^{talk to me!} 01:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Well that's sad. Thanks @Shantavira & @Ca, but I was really hoping to get my edit history merged. Thank you anyways. Matarisvan (talk) 07:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

What Shantavira said. If you like, I think you can also tweak your signature to appear as "Matarisvan (formerly PunishedRottweilerAppreciator)". Or you could register the account "PunishedRottweilerAppreciator2" and use that instead. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:08, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I've heard there is an option to merge the edit history of your old account with your new account. How can this be done? I believe if Wikipedia admins can verify that I did create the first account then they do allow the merge. In that case, I've with me the original PDF drafts of all the articles I created, which no one but the user who created them has access to. Matarisvan (talk) 10:12, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

There is no such option. We can merge edit histories of articles and their talkpages, I think. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, see WP:HM. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Gråbergs Gråa Sång & @Michael D. Turnbull, but I was really hoping to get my edit history merged. Thank you anyways. Matarisvan (talk) 07:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Matarisvan, at User:Matarisvan you can create a section 'Articles I created under a former username'. That will let people know about your previous creation work. Valereee (talk) 14:24, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, but I was really hoping to get my edit history merged. Thank you anyways. Matarisvan (talk) 07:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Some of my mathematics articles are since 3 months not reviewed such as Goldston-Pintz-Yıldırım sieve, is this normal? I understand that articles from other area have a longer reviewing procedure since one has to check notability, copyright, policy etc. but math articles? I don't think the reviewer will check whether the math is correct unless it's a mathematician that knows about the subject, but that is mostlikely not the case. So I assume the reviewer can only check few things such as sources that are used or if the name appears in a journal/book.--Tensorproduct (talk) 15:48, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

From looking at your Talk page, most of the drafts you created have been accepted as articles (including GPY sieve). What do you mean by not reviewed? New Pages Patrol? If an accepted article is not reviewed by NPP within 90 days it is automatically processed so that it will be visible via search such as Google. David notMD (talk) 15:58, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the new pages patrol. The thing with the GPY sieve was, that it was reviewed but then someone put the article again into the unreviewed category because the reviewer did not review correctly other articles (or something like that) and the user's reviewing right was taken. Now it still says unreview in Special:NewPagesFeed and it is not visible on Google even though the article is older than 90 days.--Tensorproduct (talk) 16:10, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Strange, now I can see the article on Google. When I wrote my initial comment I could not.--Tensorproduct (talk) 19:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Tensorproduct. You're not the only one experiencing this right now. The new page patrol backlog has ballooned to 10,600 articles and 14,140 redirects (and growing rapidly), which is certainly the highest I've ever seen it. In addition, a lot of reviewers often do not review subjects they're not comfortable with and thus may not often check articles on mathematics. I just reviewed your article, as it does look good, and the prominent mathematicians who've used and modified it do lend enough credibility to meet WP:GNG in my opinion. Thank you for being so patient. All the best, TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 19:50, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, all the best to you too.--Tensorproduct (talk) 19:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@Tensorproduct, have you requested WP:autopatrolled? With 32 articles you should be good. Valereee (talk) 01:45, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. I will request it (globally I wrote more than 200 math articles). Tensorproduct (talk) 15:26, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

does the section of * self verified in imdb was verified by the actors themselves or its something we still cannot use in articles? Veganpurplefox (talk) 15:08, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Still can't use it. It has moved from nonWP:RS to non-WP:IS. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:53, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

ah so it would be a primary source so I would need a source that take that information into a reliable source as I understand? Veganpurplefox (talk) 15:55, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

You can use primary sources for simple information like birth date or location of residence. However, secondary sources are always better. Ca ^{talk to me!} 02:38, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

can I use the primary source for these: Athletics *

Boxing | Cycling | Equestrian | Fencing | Martial Arts | Skateboarding | Surfing | Tennis | Yoga

Accents *

British | French

• self-verified

There is no secondary sources that refers to these Veganpurplefox (talk) 02:42, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Without more context, it is hard to know for sure. However, details about accents seems trivial. It probably should not be included unless an independent source reports on it. Ca ^{talk to me!} 16:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I see, maybe with time there will be an independent article that will talk about it. Im trying to reach out to medias but have no luck yet :( Veganpurplefox (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I have just restored some previous edits to Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool by an anonymous user who had added a lot of valuable information over the past few days. I found that the user was a mobile user and the user said that he couldn’t cite the sources he took the information from. So I was able to restore them and cite them for him and for that page. But some of the restored edits were being reversed by SamX for copyvio. I don’t understand. Why do you remove content when it is cited and the sources are cited. If this continues, I might leave Wikipedia for good. Because how unfair it is to claim that it is completely copyright when clearly the sources were cited and referenced accordingly to Wikipedia policy. DavidDunnymede (talk) 18:44, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Material from sources must be paraphrased and not copied verbatum. RudolfRed (talk) 19:04, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

What is paraphrasing? Can you give an example? DavidDunnymede (talk) 19:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@DavidDunnymede, there is a lot of information and some examples at WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:24, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you DavidDunnymede (talk) 19:29, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

It's surprising that somebody whose user page describes him as a senior lecturer at the University of Central Lancashire is unacquainted with paraphrasing. 119.245.86.251 (talk) 19:44, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@DavidDunnymede The top of the article has the relevant copyright-infringing details. They will be removed from the article and redacted from its history. See WP:COPYVIO for general considerations. As RudolfRed (nearly) wrote, verbatim copying is not permitted unless specifically marked as a quotation in circumstances where quotations are appropriate. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Note: OP has been blocked as a sockpuppet. CodeTalker (talk) 18:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

If it's possible to create a song using the MIDI format as shown in WP:MIDI. All I need to know is how to convert a note to a whole, half, eighth, tied, etc. And if it's possible to change a note's pitch an octave higher or lower, and to sharpen/flat the note. I wanted to test it out in my sandbox, but I just need to know if any of the things listed are possible. Thanks, 🄼🄾🄳 🄲🅁🄴🄰🅃🄾🅁 (talk) 23:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mod creator, and welcome to the Teahouse, I'm not sure what you're asking. The section you link to mentions various pieces of software you can use to create midi files. Are you asking about the score extensions? If so, then it also links to mw:Extension:Score, which should answer your questions. ColinFine (talk) 10:44, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

By the way, I find your signature hard to read. ColinFine (talk) 10:45, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I'm asking about the extension itself in question. Also, I deeply apologize about my signature, I thought it'd be creative. I'll eventually fix it when I can. - 🄼🄾🄳 🄲🅁🄴🄰🅃🄾🅁 (talk) 03:41, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

To answer your question, the extension uses Lilypond notation, which is quite flexible and can do all the things you asked about (and much more). I created a quick example in my own sandbox which demonstrates tied notes, octaves, and accidentals. The intent is to use the Lilypond software to generate the right markup, but if you have something relatively simple, you can just enter it by hand as I have done in my sandbox link above. Good luck! Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 18:36, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Can someone explain to me that how's this Sangram Singh Patan article eligible for wikipedia WP:BLP Rajmama (talk) 13:21, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Rajmama and welcome to the teahouse. Personally, I think this article does not satisfy BLP. It has promotional wording such as tremendous social work, massive impact, and crushed all his opponents. It is also unreferenced.

You are welcome to improve the article by yourself, or you can nominate its deletion through Wikipedia:Proposed deletion. Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 13:29, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I need to mention that, to determine whether you wish to delete this article, you should determine the WP:Notability of the subject. Reading WP:POLITICIAN would be surely helpful. TheLonelyPather (talk) 13:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rajmama, it looks pretty iffy unless being "the member of Zila Parishad from Patan(west) of Palamu district of Jharkhand state" confers notability. Unfortunately I have no idea what exact level of government a member of Zila Parishad is, but our article at District council (India) doesn't seem to indicate it's more than local? Valereee (talk) 13:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm also found more articles like this on Wikipedia which is not eligible for WP:BLP but I don't know how to add deletion Tag? Or I don't know I'm eligible or not eligible for that so please help me for this for my better contributions. Rajmama (talk) 15:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

@Rajmama, anyone can add a tag. WP:Twinkle makes it very easy to do so. Valereee (talk) 15:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the puffery and unsourced, and it turns out everything is unsourced, including the fact he actually holds that office. Someone familiar with sources in Hindi might be able to find something? Valereee (talk) 13:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Valereee, Zila Parishad is upper tier of rural local government in India. Above it lies Member of Legislative Assembly. The membership of Zila Parishad is also an elected office and I think it fulfills WP:NPOL-Admantine123 (talk) 16:37, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, @Admantine123! My ignorance of Indian politics is showing. If you believe this person is automatically notable, please argue that at the AfD and I won't dispute it. Valereee (talk) 18:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, the statements "as of <year>" or "since <year>" may not be true in the future. Therefore I have been updating them according to MOS:SINCE using the {{as of}} template. A lot of my edits have been reverted but cannot see the mistake I made. Any help would be appreciated! Lightbloom (talk) 13:59, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

The "as of" template is intended to be used where information is expected to become outdated, and so marks it for regular review. It is not intended to be applied in every case the words "as of" or "since" are present. In many of your edits, swapping "since" for "as of" breaks the flow of the sentence. WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I see, so it's preferred to remove these relative time references. And if one can't, one should keep the language the same when using the template? Lightbloom (talk) 16:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

No, as specified in MOS:SINCE, "since" and "as of" are fine, since they are relative to a fixed time, so they mean the same thing when you read them now, tomorrow, or a dozen years from now. What it says to avoid is time statements that are relative to the now, such as "today" or "recently", because the meaning of those statements changes depending on when you read them. WelpThatWorked (talk) 17:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

So if the information won't change, but perhaps the time range will, then it's fine to use "as of" and "since" and we shouldn't use the template to indicate a change. But if the information is changing with time, such as population at the time of a census, then we should indicate that with the template (and keep the language the same). However MOS:SINCE also states "Relative-time expressions are acceptable for very long periods" so if we are using "since" and "as of" without a template then we should preferably replace them with absolute time expressions except in very long periods. Is that correct? Lightbloom (talk) 17:46, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

To give you some examples, Lightbloom, your addition of the template to "As of 2021, the population of Eindhoven consisted of 235,691 people" here was good, because Eindhoven's population will have inevitably have changed since 2021 even if we don't have a more recent, reliable estimate, whereas replacing the "since" in "Apple has had a presence in Cupertino since 1977", as you did here wasn't, as the date that Apple established a presence in Cupertino is a historical fact that won't change. "As of" and "since" are not grammatically interchangeable. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I see, so the template should only be used if the information is subject to change, but not if the date might change. If the date might change one should instead update it to remove relative time references. And if the template is used, keep the language the same. Lightbloom (talk) 16:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

@Lightbloom, idiomatic English counts very much. Here's an example.

Here's what the uncopyedited change did.

From:

While the complexity, size, construction and general form of CPUs have changed enormously since 1950, the basic design

to:

While the complexity, size, construction and general form of CPUs have changed enormously as of 1950, the basic design

"have changed...as of 1950" isn't idiomatic, and it's less precise. I'm not sure what it means...did all the changes occur in 1950 in one fell swoop? Or have there been evolving changes since then? The original, "have changed...since" is idiomatic and more precise. It tells me there have been changes happening over time. Valereee (talk) 18:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I think I understand why the language shouldn't change now. So it shouldn't be tagged with the template, but preferably the relative time expressions should be changed to absolute since we're not talking about very long time periods (as per MOS:SINCE). Is that correct? Lightbloom (talk) 18:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

LB, I'd have to see an example. I might go into an article and see:

In recent years, X has happened.

And I look at the source, which is from 2015, and I see I can change the text to:

As of 2015, X had been happening.

Which is something that won't go out of date. But it's all very idiosyncratic to the situation. We can't just say "So it shouldn't be tagged with the template, but preferably the relative time expressions should be changed to absolute since we're not talking about very long time periods (as per MOS:SINCE)." We have to look at each situation individually. The template is just a tool to make it easier in certain situations. We could literally need 1000 templates. For me, it's better if I just recast the language so that it won't go out of date. Valereee (talk) 18:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I am trying to publish an article on the Albany Composite Squadron. If any CAP members are reading please look at it and tell me what information thaat I needed other than the info I already have. Reese82R (talk) 18:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

@Reese82R: You'd have an easier time finding CAP members to help by posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Civil Air Patrol. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

oh my bad thanks Reese82R (talk) 19:59, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Article: Only Up!

Would I have a conflict of interest if:
1. I was one of the developers of that game
2. I made an advertisement of that game
3. I wrote an article reviewing the game
Thanks, Tarantula^TM (speak with me) (my legacy) 15:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Those are all absolutely conflicts of interest with regards to "the game". This does not mean that you are absolutely forbidden from contributing about it, though you may wish to consider carefully if you are the best person to do so. Please read the conflict of interest policy.

Furthermore, if you were paid for any of this work, the Terms of Use require you to make the stricter paid editing disclosure. 331dot (talk) 15:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I think the case 3 is different from the other 2. You would only have a conflict of interest in case 3 if you were citing your own review. If other people have reviewed the game, and your edits were based solely on those other reviews, then I don't think that would be a COI. ColinFine (talk) 22:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

The article [13] is written entirely in English, but does not have a counterpart in the English-language Wikipedia. Perhaps, it can be transferred to the EN Wikipedia, but someone needs to write a French version. Or maybe there are other solutions (?) B030510 (talk) 21:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

The article appears in French to me. Do you have automatic translation turned on in your browser? As for whether or not there should be an equivalent English article, the best place to start would be to see if the subject meets our general notability guideline, which may be different from French Wikipedia notability standards. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 22:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

@Orange Suede Sofa Looking more carefully, I see that the article first flashes in French, and then changes to English. And yes, my browser does that to other FR articles too. Thanks B030510 (talk) 22:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Then yes, your browser is automatically translating. Depending on the browser you are using, there will be a way to turn that off for just the article you are viewing (for example, in Chrome and Edge, there will be an icon in the address bar to turn it off) and/or to turn it off altogether; you should consult your browser's help material to figure that out. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 22:17, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Indeed. Thx. B030510 (talk) 22:20, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I'm having a bit of an edit war situation on page Jan Frans van Bloemen. A while ago, I did a reference clean-up of the article, created an infobox, and moved some images to a newly created gallery. My thinking was to avoid MOS:SANDWICH with the previous layout of alternating images in the text, especially with the move to fixed width pages. Editor Imaganinary reverted the layout to alternating images, I reverted it and so on. He even reverted an unrelated edit correcting a reference. I've never been in an edit war, so not sure how to handle it. Post on his talk page or the article page? Curiocurio (talk) 00:57, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Either way works, whatever allows you to open a conversation. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:19, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. However, it's obvious he's not going to stop, as he has just reverted another editor's reversion. Curiocurio (talk) 01:21, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

I've tried searching for the policy guidelines on the use of non-English language sources to no avail. Could someone point me in the right direction? Barry Wom (talk) 10:52, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Barry Wom: see WP:NONENG. TL;DNR = sources don't need to be in English, as long as they are otherwise up to the required standards (or reliability etc.). Other things being equal, and if there is a choice, English-language sources are obviously preferred, given that's the common language of the readers of the English-language Wikipedia. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Barry Wom, just adding on that many pages have been translated from other language versions and therefore contain many non-English sources. For example, this page will show articles that are currently using a certain type of reference template from fr-Wikipedia, so those citations are, of course, in French: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Num%C3%A9ro&limit=500&hideredirs=1&hidelinks=1

And sometimes topics of regional importance require non-English sources. I recently worked on a Good Article nomination for a subject where nearly all quality sources were in Swedish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%84ngelholm_UFO_memorial#References Rjjⁱⁱⁱ(talk) 03:12, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

And I'd like to highlight the good practice that Rjjiii's article follows, which is to include the original non-English text in the citation. I was once involved in a content discussion where a claim was sourced to a Finnish language source, and my Finnish dictionary had a slightly different English definition for a key term than another editor's Finnish dictionary. Providing the original language text brings transparency and makes it easier for readers to evaluate the translation themselves, which is a good way to build trust as an encyclopedia. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 03:35, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Are these sources reliable to write about Vladimir Furdik?

• [14]
• [15]
• [16]
• [17]

Thank you in advance. ColinSchm (talk) 10:50, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

The problem at Vladimir Furdik is that it is under-referenced because an editor recently removed the above listed four of the five refs. Consider contacting User:Hipal to ask why. David notMD (talk) 12:13, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello - I think posting WP:RSN is better for reliability questions. Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:32, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

@ColinSchm Just looking at the URL, 2 of these are wikis, which are inherently unreliable as WP:USERGENERATED. And "ladbible.com" doesn't sound very hopeful, either! Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:47, 10 September 2023 (UTC)